Legislative Report - Collaborative Roadmap Phase III (December 15, 2021)
Summary
A legislative report dated December 15, 2021, for the Collaborative Roadmap Phase III project, prepared for the 2022 legislative session. The executive summary describes Phase III as a two-year project, funded by the Washington State Legislature during the 2021 legislative session, focused on updates to the state's growth policy framework. The report covers developing the scope of recommendations, convening a Task Force with a 2021 engagement summary, recommendation sheets, and looking ahead to the 2023 legislative session. Its appendices include the project framework, a review of prior studies and findings, a preliminary scope of recommendations report and a description of consent decision making for the Task Force.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Legislative Report - Collaborative Roadmap Phase III (December 15, 2021).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2021-commercereports-lgd-collaborativeroadmapphaseiii-final-f2fcaa54-6-ac9ab4cb82/
, SHA-256 16a9d322dd08efc965b258e4f586806aab77560051f45e7ece4fed4ded489462.Full text
December 15, 2021
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5
Project Overview and Purpose ............................................................................................ 5
Findings, Concepts, and Recommendations from Recent Reports ...................................... 5
Developing the Preliminary Scope of Recommendations .................................................... 7
Developing recommendations for 2022 legislative session ................................................. 10
Convening a Task Force.................................................................................................... 10
Engaging Diverse Perspectives ......................................................................................... 10
Recommendations to the Legislature ............................................................................... 10
Engagement Summary for 2021 ....................................................................................... 11
Legislative recommendations for 2022 ................................................................................ 14
Recommendation Sheets ..................................................................................................... 16
Looking ahead to 2022 and the 2023 legislative session ..................................................... 32
Engagement Strategy ....................................................................................................... 32
Defining the potential 2023 scope of issues ..................................................................... 34
Appendix A: Project Framework and Path to Success (Project Deliverable 1) ...................... 36
Appendix B: Review of Prior Studies and Findings (Project Deliverable 2) ........................... 68
Appendix C: Preliminary Scope of Recommendations Report (Project Deliverable 3) ........ 126
Appendix D: Consent Decision Making for the Task Force ................................................. 153
Figures
Figure 1: Project schedule and timeline .................................................................................. 3
Figure 2: Important milestones ............................................................................................... 4
Figure 3: Elements of the Review of Prior Studies and Findings .............................................. 6
Figure 4: Defining the scope of issues for the Task Force to address ..................................... 7
Figure 5: Filtering issues for 2022 scope ................................................................................ 8
Figure 6: Topical categories and potential issues ................................................................... 9
Figure 8: Ingredients to forming recommendations .............................................................. 14
Figure 9: Detailed project phases and deliverables for 2022 ................................................. 32
Photo Credits
Cover: paweesit, Flickr, Creative Commons CC BY-ND 2.0
Page 4: Jim Culp, Flickr, Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 2
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
The Collaborative Roadmap Phase III project (Phase III) is a two-year project, funded by the
Washington State Legislature during the 2021 legislative session, focused on updates to the
state’s growth policy framework. Phase III includes three primary objectives:
• Convene a Task Force, which includes diverse perspectives, to make recommendations
to the legislature regarding needed reforms to the state’s growth policy framework;
• Task Force recommendations shall build upon the findings, concepts, and
recommendations in recent state-funded reports; and
• Include in these discussions the lived experiences and perspectives of people who
have too often been excluded from public policy decision-making and unevenly
impacted by those decisions.
In addition to engagement, which is the key to forming recommendations, Phase III
accomplishes these objectives through issuance of several reports. This includes Legislative
Reports prior to the 2022 and 2023 sessions. This Legislative Report focuses on:
• Developing the scope of recommendations for the 2022 legislative session
• Convening the Task Force and 2021 engagement
• Recommendations to the Legislature from the Task Force
• Looking ahead to the 2023 legislative session
Figure 1: Project schedule and timeline
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 3
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
t
Figure 2: Important milestones
2021
Review of Prior
Studies Report
Task Force We Are
formation and Here
meetings Preliminary Scope of
Recommendations
Report
2021 Legislative
Report
2022
Ongoing work -
• Legislative session engagement
• Task Force meetings
• Ongoing engagement
Final Scope of
Recommendations
Report – June 1, 2022
2022 Legislative
Report – December
2023 15, 2022
Ongoing work -
• Legislative session
engagement
Closeout Report and
Final
LEGISLATIVE
Recommendations – REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 4
June 1, 2023
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Project Overview and Purpose Excerpt from Engrossed Substitute
The Collaborative Roadmap Phase III (Phase III) Senate Bill (ESSB) 5092 (Operating
project builds upon the findings, concepts, and Budget):
recommendations from recent state-funded reports. [Commerce is] to convene a task force
to make recommendations regarding
To accomplish this, Phase III convenes a task force
needed reforms to the state’s growth
to build upon past reports and make
policy framework […]. The process will
recommendations to the Washington State build upon the findings, concepts, and
Legislature on proposed reforms to the state’s recommendations in recent state-
growth policy framework. funded reports […]. The task force must
involve diverse perspectives including
Washington State’s growth policy framework
but not limited to representatives of
consists of state laws that govern or influence the counties, cities, special districts, the
strategies state agencies and local governments use real estate, building, and agricultural
to plan for, implement, and manage land use policy, industries, planning and environmental
permitting and appeals, infrastructure, and organizations, Tribal governments, and
environmental protections. The laws that guide our state agencies. Special effort must be
framework and are being reviewed as part of this made to include in these discussions
project are provided in Appendix B. The Task Force the lived experiences and perspectives
will provide recommendations to the legislature prior of people who have too often been
excluded from public policy decision-
to the 2022 and 2023 sessions.
making and unevenly impacted by
Beyond the Task Force, engaging diverse audiences those decisions.
in developing recommendations for the legislature is ESSB 5092, pg. 64 - 65
a vital part of this project. This includes people who have historically been overlooked as public
policy is developed.
This report presents the Task Force’s 2021 recommendations for legislative consideration
during the 2022 session. It also provides an overview of documents and reports produced
leading up to this legislative report, a summary of engagement to date, and an overview for
upcoming work in 2022.
Findings, Concepts, and Recommendations from Recent Reports
To enable the Task Force to build upon past efforts and provide additional recommendations
for changes to the growth policy framework, the project team reviewed prior studies and
findings from those studies. The four previous state-funded reports reviewed in Appendix B are
the Land Use Study Commission (1998), Governor’s Land Use Agenda (2006), A Road Map to
Washington’s Future (2019), and Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework (2021).
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 5
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Recommendations from past studies
have resulted in successful legislation
over the past two decades. With renewed
attention paid to updating the growth
policy framework through the recent Road
Map to Washington’s Future and Updating
Washington’s Growth Policy Framework
projects, new legislation has been
introduced to address recommendations
and opportunities identified within those
reports. Additional legislation has been
introduced but has not yet been passed
by the Legislature. Many of those bills are
likely to be reintroduced and provide a
foundation on which to build for the 2022
and 2023 legislative sessions.
Figure 3: Elements of the Review of Prior Studies and Findings
The Review of Prior Studies and Findings, included as Appendix B, provides an overview of:
• Key findings, concepts and recommendations from recent reports
• Conclusions and lessens learned from each of those studies
• Successful and pending bills that implement recommendations from A Road Map to
Washington’s Future (2019) and Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework
(2021).
Key information gleaned from prior reports and studies also included the engagement efforts
undertaken and the way in which information was presented to the Legislature. Robust
statewide engagement, particularly during the Road Map to Washington’s Future project,
provided a thorough accounting of the complex issues involved in how the statutes composing
the growth policy framework are implemented. Additionally, the Land Use Study Commission
and Governor’s Agenda provided issue sheets and papers that present concise
recommendations or options along with context to assist the Legislature. These documents
informed the design of the recommendation sheets provided in this report.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 6
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Developing the Preliminary Scope of Recommendations
To identify the preliminary scope of issues to be addressed by the Task Force prior to the 2022
legislative session and possible issues to address prior to the 2023 legislative session, the
project team examined prior reports and studies along with legislation that has become law or
been introduced during the past two legislative sessions.
Substantial progress has already been made in making reforms to Washington State’s growth
policy framework. The Review of Prior Studies and Findings Report examines the progress
made on the recommendations in previous state-funded reports and studies and identifies bills
that have passed during previous legislative sessions or are likely to be reintroduced during the
2022 session. The remaining issues are the focus of the Phase III project.
Remaining findings
and concepts to
Findings, concepts,
make
and Legislation passed Legislation
recommendations
recommendations during previous introduced during
on prior to the
from State-funded sessions previous sessions
2022 and 2023
reports
legislative
sessions
Figure 4: Defining the scope of issues for the Task Force to address
The Preliminary Scope of Recommendations Report, included as Appendix C, focuses on:
• Process to refine the list of findings, concepts, and recommendations to be taken up by
the Task Force.
• Grouping of findings, concepts, and recommendations into topical categories.
• Defining the list of issues to be taken up by the Task Force prior to the 2022 legislative
session.
• Defining the potential list of issues to be taken up by the Task Force prior to the 2023
legislative session.
Defining the scope of issues to be taken up by the Task Force prior to the 2022 legislative
session involved three steps: identification of findings from previous reports and studies as
discussed in the previous section; initial engagement and feedback; and filtering the first two
through opportunities and constraints to consider for work prior to the 2022 session.
Early engagement for Phase III included meeting virtually with: lawmakers, including
presentations to the House Local Government Committee and Senate Housing and Local
Government Committee; potential Task Force members; state agencies; and other interested
groups. The project team focused on issues these groups felt the Task Force should prioritize
prior to the 2022 legislative session as well as broader priorities for the project to help scope
the Task Force’s work for 2022 after the upcoming session ends.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 7
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Recommended focus areas included:
• Funding local government Comprehensive Plan Initial
updates. This was particularly emphasized given engagement
and
that the legislature has passed or is considering feedback
several bills that increase local government
planning requirements under the Growth
Management Act (GMA). Under the GMA, new or
Preliminary
amended elements shall be null and void until Findings from scope of issues
funds sufficient to cover applicable local prior reports to take up prior
to 2022
and studies
government costs are appropriated and distributed legislative
session
by the state. This must occur at least two years
before a local government must update a
comprehensive plan.
• Changes needed in 2022 so that cities and Project
opportunities
counties with a 2024 periodic update deadline have and
constraints
time to implement statutory changes.
• Providing ideas for how the GMA applies to
different areas of the state, particularly rural areas.
Figure 5: Filtering issues for 2022 scope
This report refers to this as “adaptive planning”.
• Local government permit processes and timelines, particularly relating to housing.
To prioritize issues to address prior to the 2022 legislative session, the project team analyzed
opportunities and contraints. Early action opportunities include the ability to provide
recommendations on issues that should be addressed this year so cities and counties that
have a 2024 periodic update deadline have time to implement new laws. Constraints include
2022 being a short session, the number of bills introduced last session that may be
reintroduced and prioritized, and the short amount of time available for engagement and Task
Force review of issues prior to the 2022 session.
To make issues easier to understand as they relate to the growth policy framework, the project
team developed topical categories. Each issue that the Task Force will take up relates to one of
the categories on the following page. Appendix C provides a more in-depth review of each
category and potential issues that may be taken up under each of these categories. Figure 6
(next page) demonstrates how specific issues are aligned with identified topic categories.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 8
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Adaptive Funding and Integrating
Annexations
Planning Timelines Planning
• Addressing varied • Funding for cities and • The link between • Ways to encourage
planning requirements counties to implement planning by cities and annexations in
for urban and rural requirements of the counties and other accordance with the
cities and counties growth policy important local and Gorwth Management
• Ways to make planning framework regional service Act (GMA) and create
processes more • Issues involving the providers and state processes that sync
predictable and to timelines under which agencies. well with city, county
recognize regional cities and counties • Includes utility and and special district
differences must meet planning school districts and plannign requirements
requirements how they can be better
integrated with city and
county planning for
population and
employment growth
Permit Process Housing Environment Transportation
• Opportunities to • Changes to the growth • New or modified • New or modified
streamline permit policy framework that requirements within the requirements
processes and review encourage a variety of growth policy impacting
timelines housing types for all framework impacting transportation
• Maintaining strong income levels environmental
public participation regulations or policies
during permit review • Includes climate
change and critical
areas
Figure 6: Topical categories and potential issues
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 9
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Developing recommendations for 2022 legislative session
Convening a Task Force
A Task Force composed of 12 members representing diverse perspectives on growth policy
issues has been convened. The Task Force met three times in 2021 and has considered
several issues to inform the Legislature’s work during the 2022 legislative session. Working
groups and one-on-one outreach have informed the Task Force’s recommendations (see the
Engagement Summary for 2021 for details on specific engagement activities).
Working Groups Legislative Report -
discuss issues December 12, 2021
•Task Force •Task Force
Meeting #1 •Task Force Meeting #3 •Task Force
•10/25 Meeting #2 •11/30 follow-up
Working Groups •11/16 Working Groups
discuss issues discuss issues
Figure 7: Task Force meeting and feedback process in 2021
Engaging Diverse Perspectives
The legislature charged the Phase III project to engage diverse perspectives, particularly Tribes
and those who have been traditionally underrepresented in public policy decision-making and
unevenly impacted by these policies. The project team developed an engagement plan, began
implementing this plan in 2021, and is preparing to implement its strategy for 2022. The
Engagement Summary for 2021 contains more detailed descriptions of meetings,
presentations, and discussions with the Task Force, working groups, legislative committees,
and other groups from September through December 2021. For a description of engagement
going forward, please see the chapter looking ahead to the 2023 legislative session.
Recommendations to the Legislature
The Task Force took up five specific issues and has made recommendations on four of those
issues. The Task Force has made recommendations to the Legislature on the following issues
for 2022:
• Funding for local government planning
• Sales tax incentive for annexations
• Permit process – collection and reporting of permit data
• Adaptive planning – simplifying required comprehensive plan and development
regulations updates
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 10
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Task Force also took up the issue of whether additional time was needed for some
jurisdictions to complete the required periodic update for comprehensive plans and
development regulations. It did not make a formal recommendation on this issue.
The project team has also developed a potential scope of issues for the Task Force to consider
during 2022 prior to the 2023 legislative session. Those issues and any recommendations the
Task Force offers on those issues will be addressed by a scope of recommendations report
and legislative report prior to commencement of the 2023 session.
The detailed recommendations can be found in the Legislative Recommendations for 2022
section of this report.
Engagement Summary for 2021
Priority Group Outreach
The project team has focused on engaging harder-to-reach populations in the Collaborative
Roadmap Phase III process. Engagement prior to the 2022 session has focused on:
1. Identifying community-based organizations (CBOs) that will have valuable input for the
Task Force.
2. Engaging on key issues for the 2022 session where appropriate.
3. Education on why and how Washington land use policy affects everyone.
The project team reached out by email and phone to more than 50 human services, affordable
housing, education, and other community-based organizations to invite them to participate in
the Collaborative Roadmap process.
As part of its efforts to include groups that might not ordinarily participate in land use policy
discussions, the project team shared educational materials from the Municipal Research and
Services Center, the Ruckelshaus Center and Futurewise to help CBOs learn more about
planning and land use policies in Washington. During these discussions, the project team
helped these groups connect issues that affect their clients and members (such as housing
affordability) with land use policy at the state and local level. The project team will continue
education and outreach regarding the Roadmap and the growth policy framework and will bring
issues identified during these discussions to the Task Force in 2022.
Working Groups
Given the tight timeline for providing the Task Force with substantive feedback and context on
issues before the 2022 session, the project team responded by quickly convening several
working groups to provide feedback on the issues the Task Force addressed in 2021. These
discussions provided important context to Task Force meetings, and working groups are a key
component of engagement in 2022.
Task Force – ensuring diverse voices are heard
The Phase III Task Force is composed of members representing the perspectives specifically
outlined in the budget proviso that funded the work. The project team identified and onboarded
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 11
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
twelve Task Force members from September through November. This ensured that these
perspectives were integral in Task Force discussions early in the Phase III project. The project
team expects to include an additional member representing special purpose districts for work
in 2022. The process to onboard this potential Task Force member has already begun.
The project team used outreach with community-based organizations to identify potential Task
Force members from communities “who have often been excluded from public policy decision-
making and unevenly impacted by those decisions,” as outlined in the budget proviso. From
this group, the project team invited Pateros Mayor Carlene Anders, Mario Reyes, Director of
Educational Programs at Wenatchee CAFÉ, and Deric Gruen of Front and Centered to serve on
the Task Force. Each brings decades of experience and expertise in serving their communities.
The project team continues to serve as a resource for these Task Force members who, though
they may be new to this kind of process, bring considerable expertise to the group.
The following representatives serve on the Phase III Task Force:
Carlene Anders Mayor of Pateros, WA and Disaster Leadership Team
Dave Andersen Department of Commerce
Bill Clarke WA Realtors
Tim Gates Department of Ecology
Deric Gruen Front and Centered
Jan Himebaugh Building Industry of Washington
Paul Jewell WA State Association of Counties
Carl Schroeder Association of Washington Cities
Mario Reyes CAFÉ
John Stuhlmiller Washington Farm Bureau
Joe Tovar WA American Planning Association
Bryce Yadon Futurewise
Tribal Engagement in 2021
Tribal engagement before the session included letters to individual Tribal Chairs to let them
know about the upcoming work and to ask for representatives from the Tribe to participate in
the process. Commerce also met with Representative Pollett, and with Tribal representatives to
discuss participation in the upcoming legislative session. A follow up letter to Tribal Chairs and
Tribal Planning Directors describing the proposed approach in the 2023 session is planned for
late 2021/early 2022.
Task Force Decision Making Process
In response to requests from Task Force members for a clear process for group
recommendations, the project team researched and introduced the Consent Decision Making
Process. This process uses an approach of shared tolerance over consensus or simple
majority rule. It also emphasizes the importance of clear, shared understanding of proposals,
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 12
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
and the value of input from all members of the group. The project team produced a handout
and brief training for the Task Force (see Appendix D). So far, the Task Force has embraced
this method, which has produced results – using it, the Task Force made formal
recommendations on four issues for 2022.
Once the Task Force has agreed on a recommendation, the project team records it in a
recommendation form created from a template developed specifically for this project. The
form contains background information on the policy proposal, possible affected statutes and
budget impacts. The project team also records objections in the form, making it clear which
Task Force representatives did not approve of the recommendation.
The project team chose the Consent Decision Making Process for the Task Force because it
uses a clear process that does not allow any one point of view to dominate. All voices at the
table have equal weight, and are given opportunities to ask clarifying questions, propose
amendments, and finally consent or oppose a proposal. By using this process, representatives
of communities who have otherwise felt excluded or alienated from policy making discussions
will feel empowered to speak up and share their expertise and experience.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 13
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Legislative recommendations for 2022
The Legislature has charged the Phase III Task Force with building upon past work in order to
make recommendations on how to update and reform the state’s growth policy framework.
Recent reports and studies conducted extensive engagement and outlined findings, concepts,
and recommendations with which to build upon. Phase III puts a premium on Task Force
recommendations offering specific and actionable recommendations to the Legislature.
Task Force Recommend-
Issues Engagement
ations
Review
Figure 8: Ingredients to forming recommendations
Additionally, the project team and the Task Force adopted a modified consent process
described in the 2021 engagement section of this Legislative Report.
As a result, the project team developed a recommendation sheet template to summarize the
issue, discussion, the recommendation language, where Task Force members registered their
perspective on each issue in the consent process, possible advantages and disadvantages of
the proposal, and potential budget impacts.
The Task Force considered five issues in 2021 and forwards formal recommendations on four
of those issues to the Legislature as listed below. Each issue links to the appropriate
recommendation sheets that follow.
• Issue #1 – Funding for local government planning
“The state should provide a minimum of $10 million per year, consistent with the
Department of Commerce’s budget proposal, to provide consistent and permanent
funding to cities and counties for updating comprehensive plans and development
regulations consistent with state law requirements.”
• Issue #3 – Sales tax incentive for annexations
“The legislature should reinstate the annexation tax credit in RCW 82.14.415 and revisit
options to provide better geographic access and equity and provide for opportunities for
all affected cities and counties to benefit from resources provided by the state to
incentivize annexations.”
• Issue #4 – Permit process
“The Legislature should modify RCW 36.70B to make current permit data gathering
requirements by certain counties and cities easier to prepare to ensure permit data is
collected and reported.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 14
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Annual permit data shall be sent to the Department of Commerce by a date certain each
year and published by Commerce by a date certain to follow each year to increase public
accessibility of permit data.”
• Issue #5 – Adaptive planning
“The Legislature should amend the GMA to include an optional process for voluntary
Department of Commerce approval and defense of certain elements of countywide
planning policies, comprehensive plans, and development regulations. The legislature
should closely consider how to ensure that this process truly remains optional and does
not result in de facto minimum standards.”
The Task Force referred the second part of the draft recommendation, additional tools to
make planning processes easier for smaller jurisdictions, to 2022.
The Task Force considered, but did not make a formal recommendation on, the following issue.
The recommendation sheet still provides the issue background and overview and other
relevant information for the legislature to consider.
• Issue #2 - Consideration of additional time for some periodic updates under the Growth
Management Act (GMA)
The Task Force considered the following statement but did not make a formal
recommendation: “If during the 2022 legislative session, new legislation is passed that
would add substantial new planning requirements under the GMA, the legislature should
provide up to an additional 12 months for counties and cities with a June 2024 periodic
update deadline (RCW 36.70A.130(5)(a)) to revise their comprehensive plans and
development regulations.”
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 15
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Recommendation Sheets
Task Force Recommendation Sheet #1 – Funding for local government
planning
Date 11 16 2021
MM DD YY
Issue Funding for Local Government planning
Did the Task Force make a Yes ☒ No ☐
formal recommendation?
Recommendation The state should provide a minimum of $10 million per year,
consistent with the Department of Commerce’s budget proposal,
to provide consistent and permanent funding to cities and
counties for updating comprehensive plans and development
regulations consistent with state law requirements.
Possible statutes to be N/A
amended
Unanimous Yes ☒ No ☐
recommendation? If no, see
objections.
Do we expect this Yes ☒ No ☐
recommendation to have a
budget impact?
Did this issue derive from a Yes ☒ No ☐ Study or Report
previous study? If yes,
which study or report? A Road Map to Washington's Future
(2019)
Task Force representative Consent – Carlene Anders (Pateros), Dave Andersen (Department
tally and notes of Commerce), Bill Clarke (WA Realtors), Tim Gates (Department
of Ecology), Deric Gruen (Front and Centered), Carl Schroeder
(AWC), Joe Tovar (APA), Bryce Yadon (Futurewise)
Object - None
Not Present – Paul Jewell (WSAC), Jan Himebaugh (BIAW), Mario
Reyes (CAFÉ), John Stuhlmiller (WA Farm Bureau)
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 16
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Issue overview and • The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires a periodic
background update of comprehensive plans and implementing
development regulations every eight years (RCW
36.70A.130).
• The update typically includes planning for additional
population and employment growth as well as updating
policies and regulations consistent with new best
available science, new case law, and changes to codes
and policies consistent with state law changes made
since the last periodic update.
• Periodic update requirements vary across the state.
Typically, there are greater requirements for more urban
counties and the cities within those counties.
• Consistent and permanent funding for periodic updates
and other required planning has diminished since the
GMA was passed.
• The Department of Commerce has developed a budget
request for $10 million per year, which would provide
permanent and consistent funding for counties and cities.
• The Commerce proposal would provide planning grants
for periodic updates across the state. Commerce has
developed a methodology for grant distributions. During
non-update periods, the allocation would be used for
competitive grants and funding for other required
programs, such as the buildable lands program (RCW
36.70A.215).
• RCW 36.70A.070(9) requires “that new or amended
elements required after January 1, 2002… shall be null
and void until funds sufficient to cover applicable local
government costs are appropriated and distributed by the
state at least two years before local government must
update comprehensive plans as required in RCW
36.70A.130.” This recommendation does not include
costs associated with new requirements that may be
considered by the legislature during the 2022 session.
Specific statutory changes, None
if applicable
Engagement summary Discussed by working groups.
Discussed by the Task Force at its meeting on 10/25/2021 and
again on 11/16/2021.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 17
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Advantages and Advantages Disadvantages
disadvantages of
implementing • Stable and consistent • Current request does not
recommendation funding will help local consider funding
governments define and necessary for new or
execute their planning amended comprehensive
work programs. plan elements, which the
• Commerce proposal legislature may consider
includes funding for during the 2022 session.
recent changes to state • Permanent general fund
laws, including the impact for providing
Housing element of the funds for the period
GMA (HB 1220). This update and other planning
would provide funding requirements.
consistent with RCW
36.70A.130
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 18
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Task Force Recommendation Sheet #2 – Consideration of additional time
for some periodic updates under the Growth Management Act
Date 11 30 2021
MM DD YY
Issue Consideration of additional time for some periodic updates under the
Growth Management Act (GMA)
Did the Task Force Yes ☐ No ☒
make a formal
recommendation?
Recommendation The Task Force considered the following statement but did not make a
language formal recommendation: “If during the 2022 legislative session, new
legislation is passed that would add substantial new planning
requirements under the GMA, the legislature should provide up to an
additional 12 months for counties and cities with a June 2024 periodic
update deadline (RCW 36.70A.130(5)(a)) to revise their comprehensive
plans and development regulations.”
Possible statutes to RCW 36.70A.130 - Comprehensive plans—Review procedures and
be amended schedules—Amendments.
Unanimous Yes ☐ No ☒
recommendation? If
no, see objections.
Do we expect this Yes ☐ No ☒
recommendation to
have a budget
impact?
Did this issue derive Yes ☐ No ☒ Study or Report
from a previous
study? If yes, which Choose an item.
study or report?
Task Force Consent – Carlene Anders (Pateros), Tim Gates (Department of
representative tally Ecology), Paul Jewell (WSAC), Mario Reyes (CAFÉ), Carl Schroeder
and notes (AWC), Joe Tovar (APA)
Object – Bill Clarke (WA Realtors), Jan Himebaugh (BIAW), Bryce Yadon
(Futurewise)
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 19
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Not Present – Deric Gruen (Front and Centered)
Abstain – John Stuhlmiller (Farm Bureau)
Issue overview and • The Growth Management Act (GMA) lays out the process and
background schedule by which counties and cities must update their
comprehensive plans and development regulations (RCW
36.70A.130).
• Counties and cities are required to act every eight years 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. The update typically
includes planning for additional population and employment
growth, updating policies and regulations consistent with new
best available science, new case law, and changes to codes and
policies consistent state law changes made since the last
periodic update.
• Periodic updates across the state are spread across four years.
• King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap Counties and the cities
within them are required to update plans by June 2024.
• For any new or amended comprehensive plan elements passed
into law this session to be considered required for 2024
jurisdictions, funding would have to be appropriated and
distributed prior to June 2022.
• Many of these counties and cities have already begun the
update process.
• HB 1220 (which became law in 2021) added new planning
requirements to the Housing element. Guidance is still being
developed for counties and cities to implement it.
• Additional bills are likely to be reintroduced this session that
could add substantial new requirements for counties and cities.
This includes bills that would add new planning goals and
elements and may require guidance to be developed.
• Jurisdictions that are late in completing their comprehensive
plan and development regulations periodic updates lose access
to grants and loans from the Public Works Trust Fund and the
Centennial Clean Water Fund and less competitive for
Recreation Conservation Office funding.
•
Specific statutory RCW 36.70A.130(5)
changes, if applicable
Engagement Discussed by working groups
summary
Discussed by the Task Force at its meetings on 10/25, 11/16, and
11/30/2021.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 20
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Advantages and Advantages Disadvantages
disadvantages of
implementing • For new legislation, would • Could create an issue with
recommendation provide additional time for grant timing and when
guidance to be produced and funds are required to be
utilized by counties and used.
cities (if being produced). • Could require Commerce
• It would ensure funding to to review and comment on
cover applicable local many updates in 2025,
government costs are potentially creating a
appropriated and distributed backlog.
by the state at least two • Could delay
years before local implementation of
government must update important comprehensive
comprehensive plans as plan and development
required in RCW 36.70A.130. regulation updates
• For substantial new resulting from new
requirements, it would legislation. This could
provide additional time for include delays on new
community engagement and housing requirements that
the development of policies some jurisdictions are
and regulations. already working on. This
issue forms the core of the
objections to the draft
recommendation as
written above.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 21
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Task Force Recommendation Sheet #3 – Sales tax incentive for
annexations
Date 11 30 2021
MM DD YY
Issue Sales tax incentive for annexations
Did the Task Force make a Yes ☒ No ☐
formal recommendation?
Recommendation The legislature should reinstate the annexation tax credit in RCW
82.14.415 and revisit options to provide better geographic access
and equity and provide for opportunities for all affected cities and
counties to benefit from resources provided by the state to
incentivize annexations.
Possible statutes to be RCW 82.14.415
amended
Unanimous Yes ☒ No ☐
recommendation? If no,
see objections.
Do we expect this Yes ☒ No ☐
recommendation to have a
budget impact?
Did this issue derive from Yes ☒ No ☐ Study or Report
a previous study? If yes,
which study or report? A Road Map to Washington's Future
(2019)
Task Force representative Consent – Carlene Anders (Pateros), Dave Andersen (Department
tally and notes of Commerce), Bill Clarke (WA Realtors), Tim Gates (Department of
Ecology), Jan Himebaugh (BIAW), Paul Jewell (WSAC), Mario
Reyes (CAFÉ), Carl Schroeder (AWC), Joe Tovar (APA), Bryce
Yadon (Futurewise)
Object – None
Abstain – Deric Gruen (Front and Centered)
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 22
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Issue overview and • Annexations within urban growth areas (UGAs) are
background generally encouraged by the Growth Management Act, or
GMA (RCW 36.70A.110(3-7) and RCW 36.70A.110(4).
• Method to annex land vary by city classification and can
involve petition, election, development agreements, or
interlocal agreements between governments.
• Cities and towns located in counties that plan under the
GMA can only annex property that is located within their
designated UGAs.
• In 2006, the legislature created a sales and use tax
incentive for annexations, codified in RCW 82.14.415.
• This credit was designed to facilitate annexation of large
blocks of unincorporated urban area, particular in King
County, as the credit only applied to cities in King, Pierce,
and Snohomish Counties, and only to potential annexation
areas with populations greater than 4,000 or 10,000,
depending on the size of the city proposing to annex.
• Cities using this credit could receive a credit on the state
sales tax (not an increase in the tax, but a credit back on
the existing sales tax collected city-wide) of 0.1 percent for
each qualifying annexed area (0.2 percent for areas with
greater than 20,000 people) with a maximum total credit of
0.2 percent or 0.3 percent in most cases.
• The credit ran for 10 years in most cases.
• The credit expired on January 1, 2015.
• A bill passed in 2021, 2SSB 5368, created an interlocal
agreement pathway for code cities (most cities in
Washington) to annex unincorporated areas. Annexations
would be eligible for the tax credit under this law if it is
separately reinstated by the legislature.
• Counties are at a structural disadvantage when it comes to
annexations due to their reliance on property tax and sales
and use taxes and stand to lose tax revenue as a result of
annexations.
Specific statutory Recommendation would involve, at a minimum, reinstating the
changes, if applicable credit by modifying the expiration date in RCW 82.14.415(1)(a). IN
addition, the following should be considered. Providing better
geographic access and equity to the sales tax incentive structure
could involve further altering RCW 82.14.415(1)(a), which also
contains the population threshold for potential annexation areas;
82.14.415(1), which contains the county population threshold; and
82.14.415(3)(a), which contains the credit maximums for different
community sizes.
Engagement summary The Task Force received information on this issue and discussed it
at its 11/16/2021 meeting. It continued discussion and consented
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 23
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
to the above recommendation at the 11/30/2021 meeting. Multiple
working groups provided input to the Task Force on the issue.
Advantages and Advantages Disadvantages
disadvantages of
implementing • In some cases • Current tax credit only
recommendation annexation can result in applies to cities in the
increased density state’s three largest
within Urban Growth counties, so there is a
Areas. This is geographic and equity
particularly true where disadvantage of the current
cities require law.
annexation before • Many smaller communities
providing public sewer may not be able to make
to unincorporated use of the credit due to the
urban growth areas. size of annexation areas
• The incentive may spur required and the low cap on
annexations to take the credit.
that may otherwise not • The money for the tax
be cost beneficial to a credit, because it is not
city. structured as a tax increase,
• Broadening the would have to come out of
incentive beyond that other elements of the state
which was permissible budget.
within the previous • Inequities in available sales
provisions in RCW tax revenue means that
82.14.415, could some annexations in some
provide an annexation cities are at a built-in
incentive not previously disadvantage when it
available. This could comes to whether an
include where the incentive will spur
incentive could be used annexation.
and/or the size of the
area that would qualify
for its use.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 24
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Task Force Recommendation Sheet #4 – Permit process
Date 11 30 2021
MM DD YY
Issue Permit process
Did the Task Force make a Yes ☒ No ☐
formal recommendation?
Recommendation The Legislature should modify RCW 36.70B to make current
permit data gathering requirements by certain counties and cities
easier to prepare to ensure permit data is collected and reported.
Annual permit data shall be sent to the Department of Commerce
by a date certain each year and published by Commerce by a date
certain to follow each year to increase public accessibility of
permit data.
Possible statutes to be RCW 36.70B.080(2)
amended
Unanimous Yes ☒ No ☐
recommendation? If no, see
objections.
Do we expect this Yes ☒ No ☐
recommendation to have a
budget impact?
Did this issue derive from a Yes ☐ No ☒ Study or Report
previous study? If yes,
which study or report? Choose an item.
Task Force representative Consent – Carlene Anders (Pateros), Dave Andersen (Department
tally and notes of Commerce), Tim Gates (Department of Ecology), Jan
Himebaugh (BIAW), Paul Jewell (WSAC), Mario Reyes (CAFÉ),
Carl Schroeder (AWC), Joe Tovar (APA), Bryce Yadon
(Futurewise)
Object – None
Not Present – Bill Clarke (WA Realtors), Deric Gruen (Front and
Centered), John Stuhlmiller (Farm Bureau)
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 25
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Issue overview and • The Growth Management Act (GMA) has established 13
background planning goals (RCW 36.70A.020). Goal 7 states Permits.
Applications for both state and local government permits
should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure
predictability.
• RCW 36.70B, the Local Project Review Act, was
established in 1995, after the passage of the Growth
Management Act (GMA). The legislature found that
increasing environmental laws and regulations had
increased the number of permits required for
development and increased the cost and time to receive
permits.
• The Local Project Review Act addresses procedures and
timelines for issuing permits. This includes concurrent
review of applications for projects.
• The Local Project Review Act also implements Goal 7 of
the GMA.
• RCW 36.70B.080(1) states that:
Development regulations adopted pursuant to RCW
36.70A.040 must establish and implement time
periods for local government actions for each type
of project permit application and provide timely and
predictable procedures to determine whether a
completed project permit application meets the
requirements of those development regulations. The
time periods for local government actions for each
type of complete project permit application or
project type should not exceed one hundred twenty
days, unless the local government makes written
findings that a specified amount of additional time is
needed to process specific complete project permit
applications or project types.
• RCW 36.70B.080(2)(a) establishes the requirement for
seven counties and cities within those counties with
populations over 20,000 to collect permit data and
publish data on an annual basis.
• RCW 36.70B.080(2)(b) establishes that permit data to be
collected and reported in an annual report. This includes:
(b) Counties and cities subject to the requirements
of this subsection also must prepare annual
performance reports that include, at a minimum, the
following information for each type of project permit
application identified in accordance with the
requirements of (a) of this subsection:
(i) Total number of complete applications
received during the year;
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 26
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(ii) Number of complete applications received
during the year for which a notice of final
decision was issued before the deadline
established under this subsection;
(iii) Number of applications received during the
year for which a notice of final decision was
issued after the deadline established under this
subsection;
(iv) Number of applications received during the
year for which an extension of time was
mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the
county or city;
(v) Variance of actual performance, excluding
applications for which mutually agreed time
extensions have occurred, to the deadline
established under this subsection during the
year; and
(vi) The mean processing time and the number
standard deviation from the mean.
• RCW 36.70B.080(2)(c) establishes that:
(c) Counties and cities subject to the requirements of this
subsection must:
(i) Provide notice of and access to the annual
performance reports through the county's or city's web
site; and
(ii) Post electronic facsimiles of the annual performance
reports through the county's or city's web site. Postings
on a county's or city's web site indicating that the reports
are available by contacting the appropriate county or city
department or official do not comply with the
requirements of this subsection.
• These sections of statute require collection of data on all
permit types that were deemed complete during the year,
which in some jurisdictions can be thousands of permits
per year.
Specific statutory changes, RCW 36.70B.080(2)(b) could be modified to focus only on the
if applicable application types that would provide a useful cross-section of
permit timelines. This could include subdivisions and short
subdivisions, multifamily and commercial site plan approvals,
conditional use permits, and building permits. Data would need to
include total time to approval as well as time in review by each
jurisdiction and time in the applicant’s hands. Variation from
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 27
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
established targets for issuing decision, as required by RCW
36.70B.080, could be included as well.
RCW 36.70B.080(2)(c) could be modified so that the seven
counties and cities over 20,000 population within those counties
would provide the permit data to the Department of Commerce by
a date certain each year and would furthermore charge
Commerce with producing a report on permit data collected. This
would replace the requirement to post the reports to individual
communities’ websites (although jurisdictions could still post the
data as collated by Commerce).
Engagement summary Discussed by working groups.
Discussed by the Task Force at its meetings on 11/16 and
11/30/2021.
Advantages and Advantages Disadvantages
disadvantages of
implementing • Reducing the range of • Reducing the existing
recommendation permits to focus on a permit t data collection
smaller cross-section requirements may still
could make permit data present challenges to
easier to collect for some counties and cities
jurisdictions. as they access permit
• Having Commerce data.
prepare the reports could • Different communities
present a more categorize and group
comprehensive picture of permits very differently,
permit timelines that so revising the
could inform further nomenclature within
legislation or funding to 36.70B will be important
address permitting as legislation is
issues. developed.
• Commerce providing a
single source for permit
timeline data would
ensure data is more
accessible.
• Ensuring this data is
collected and reported
would assist in gauging if
Goal 7 and the
requirements of RCW
36.70B are being met.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 28
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Task Force Recommendation Sheet #5 – Adaptive planning
Date 11 30 2021
MM DD YY
Issue Adaptive planning
Did the Task Force make a Yes ☒ No ☐
formal recommendation on
this issue?
Recommendation The Legislature should amend the GMA to include an optional
process for voluntary Department of Commerce approval and
defense of certain elements of countywide planning policies,
comprehensive plans, and development regulations. The
legislature should closely consider how to ensure that this
process truly remains optional and does not result in de facto
minimum standards.
The Task Force referred the second part of the draft
recommendation, additional tools to make planning processes
easier for smaller jurisdictions, to 2022.
Possible statutes to be RCW 36.70A (new section)
amended
Unanimous Yes ☐ No ☒
recommendation? If no, see
objections.
Do we expect this Yes ☐ No ☒
recommendation to have a
budget impact?
Did this issue derive from a Yes ☒ No ☐ Study or Report
previous study? If yes,
which study or report? A Road Map to Washington's Future
(2019)
Objections Consent – Dave Andersen (Department of Commerce), Tim Gates
(Department of Ecology), Paul Jewell (WSAC), Carl Schroeder
(AWC), John Stuhlmiller (Farm Bureau), Joe Tovar (APA), Bryce
Yadon (Futurewise)
Object – None
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 29
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstain – Bill Clarke (WA Realtors), Jan Himebaugh (BIAW)
Not Present – Carlene Anders (Pateros), Deric Gruen (Front and
Centered), Mario Reyes (CAFÉ)
Issue overview and • Planning requirements under the Growth Management
background Act (GMA) are varied. Recent reports, including A Road
Map to Washington’s Future (2019) and Updating
Washington’s Growth Policy Framework (2021), described
the current differences within our planning framework
requirements and the desire to further recognize regional
differences and needs throughout the state within our
planning framework.
• One way to recognize regional differences is to
understand that many counties and cities have limited
resources to complete required planning.
• While the Growth Management Act encourages early and
continuous public participation, appeal processes can be
costly and lengthy. Options to provide early input from
Commerce and protect cities and counties from appeals
if Commerce review shows compliance, while not
discouraging or limiting participation or the right to
appeal, could be a net benefit. The Shoreline
Management Act provides a process for Department of
Ecology review of Shoreline Master Programs like what
has been considered in current and former bills.
• In addition, providing additional resources to smaller
cities and counties could be very valuable across the
state, particularly for smaller communities with fewer
resources.
• Additional ways to recognize regional differences across
the state may be a topic the Task Force takes up in 2022.
Specific statutory changes, At least two recent bills, Senate Bill 5368, which passed the
if applicable legislature in 2021, and HB 1099, which is likely to be
reintroduced in 2022, contained for a new section of the GMA that
would set up this optional pathway for Commerce review. SB
5368 did not ultimately include the pathway for Commerce review
in its final form that became law, but the proposed language can
be found on pages 4-8 of the original bill.
HB 1099 directs Commerce to develop guidelines and model
elements and creates a new section on page 33 of the latest
version of the bill that removes administrative and judicial appeal
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 30
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
of ordinances, plans, regulations, and other nonproject actions
under Chapter 36.70A.
Engagement summary This issue was reviewed and discussed, and a recommendation
made, by the Task Force at its 11/30/2021 meeting.
Will use working groups to help the Task Force refine the options
for assistance by Commerce in 2022.
Advantages and Advantages Disadvantages
disadvantages of
implementing • Offering additional • The optional review by
recommendation assistance and defending Commerce could create a
appeals could potentially de facto minimum
have substantial benefits requirement for meeting
for small jurisdictions. GMA requirements if not
• Creating options to help carefully designed.
avoid imposing one-size- • Integrating the early and
fits-all planning on continuous public
jurisdictions with participation required in
extremely varied needs the GMA with the
and pressures has been a Commerce review and
long-standing goal for defense could be
those seeking to update complicated.
the growth policy • Additional changes, to
framework. ensure a process that will
• An existing review work well, could be
process for Shoreline warranted as a bill makes
Master Programs already it way through the
exists, as do recent bills legislature.
that have contained
language enabling
Commerce review. This
provides a good basis for
analyzing how this
process could best work.
• The process would be
optional which provides
flexibility.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 31
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Looking ahead to 2022 and the 2023 legislative session
The scope of issues for the Task Force to take up and make recommendations on prior to the
2023 legislative session will be more robust than 2022. The Task Force will have several
additional months to consider issues. Engagement through Tribes, working groups, and other
forms of outreach and engagement will be more expansive. While this report has identified the
possible scope of issues the Task Force will address in 2022, the final scope of issues will be
narrowed through engagement that will occur in spring of 2022. It will also be important to
identify issues that may need further work after the 2022 legislative session ends. A final
scope of recommendations report will be issued by June 1, 2022.
Figure 9: Detailed project phases and deliverables for 2022
Engagement Strategy
Overview
Historically, Washington’s land use policy has not always reflected the best interests of people
with low incomes, people who are older, people who use languages other than English, people
who are Black, Indigenous, and people of color, people who live in rural areas, and people who
rent their homes. Our engagement strategy prioritizes these groups.
The project team’s engagement staff will continue to seek meaningful input from community-
based organizations that are embedded in these communities, along with legislators that have
a special familiarity with them.
Engagement tools the project team will use in 2022:
• One-on-one interviews and listening sessions. Small group and individual sessions will
provide an opportunity to weigh in for those that are unfamiliar or uncomfortable with
terms typically associated with land use policy issues. The project team’s list of
community-based organizations continues to grow as it receives referrals from other
CBOs.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 32
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• Working group meetings. See section below for details.
• Reports and handouts. The project team’s previous Phase III deliverables (Appendices
A, B, and C) have proven helpful in outreach efforts.
• Legislative engagement. The project team will continue to engage legislators to
understand what their constituents are asking for when it comes to updating to
Washington’s growth policy framework.
Task Force Calendar
The project team will continue to support the Task Force through facilitation and the
Consensus Decision Making Process. Staff will continue to provide analysis and support to
Task Force members who are still learning the legislative and policy making processes, or who
are not as familiar with statewide growth policy issues as others on the Task Force.
While the Consent Decision Making Process is intended to promote equitable participation in
policy discussions, it’s important for the Collaborative Roadmap Phase III process to welcome
diverse points of view. The project team will continue working hard to ensure online Task Force
meetings remain warm and welcoming to all who participate.
Project team engagement staff will have one-on-one and small group conversations with Task
Force members between meetings. These will help support improved collaboration and
decision making.
Tribal Engagement
Tribes will be offered several opportunities for engagement. This approach is designed to be
sensitive to the amount of time requested from the Tribes while maximizing engagement
opportunities.
1) Where appropriate, Tribal-specific working groups may be established to provide input
on topical issues
2) One-on-one meetings will be offered to individual Tribes to discuss issues
3) Tribes will be kept informed about, and invited to participate in working groups on
issues they chose to engage in
4) Feedback from individual meetings or working groups will be sent to the task force for
consideration as they develop recommendations to the legislature
Working Groups
Working groups play an important role in the work done the task force will complete. Some
working groups will be one-off meetings, and others, such as the environmental and practicing
planners working groups, will meet more than once. Meetings may be centered around a policy
area (such as farmland preservation or renewable energy infrastructure) or around a shared
role in land use planning efforts (such as multifamily housing developers).
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 33
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
As the project team creates the Task Force’s calendar for its policy conversations, it will
outline a schedule for working groups to meet as well. The topics discussed during working
group meetings will reflect and inform Task Force discussions.
The Task Force may also ask working groups to more deeply investigate issues the Task Force
is interested in but does not have expertise in, such as environmental justice.
Feedback gathered so far from community-based organizations indicates interest in adding
working groups around affordable housing and environmental justice policy. Others have asked
to be added to existing working groups such as the planning or environmental working groups.
Other Priority Group Outreach
The project team will continue to seek out and engage members of groups that have been
unevenly impacted by land use policy decisions from across the state. These groups represent
immigrant communities, public health advocates, affordable housing providers, human service
providers and economic development organizations, among others. These conversations will
help the team highlight certain planning and land use issues from those that were identified in
earlier research done by the Ruckelshaus Center and collected earlier this year by the Phase III
project, and to bring new issues to light. The project team will share information gleaned from
these meetings with the Task Force and in the next report.
Defining the potential 2023 scope of issues
The potential list below will be refined and narrowed through the Task Force engagement
described previously. Any unfinished business by the Legislature during the 2022 session may
be added to this scope at the end of the session.
Funding and Timelines
• Funding for local government planning (if unresolved from previous session)
• Monitoring comprehensive plan implementation (and timelines for monitoring)
• Use of impact fees and paying for infrastructure
• Other methods for funding infrastructure
Adaptive Planning
• Updating public participation requirements for comprehensive plans in RCW
36.70A.140 (this issue may be resolved through GMA rules update)
• Review and make recommendations on state statutes, beginning with Growth
Management Act (GMA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to identify conflicts
or disconnects and how to reduce gaps, conflicts, and redundancies
Integrating Planning
• Possible new GMA goal focused on human health and well-being
• Possible new GMA goal focused on equity
• Integrate school district and local government capital facility planning
• Integrate water and sewer districts, school districts, and port districts into the GMA.
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 34
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• State agency responsibilities, including SEPA, Shoreline Management Act (SMA), and
transportation plans/concurrency
• Link utility districts and emergency service providers
• Military installations
Permit Process
• Review and make recommendations on state statutes to identify conflicts or
disconnects and how to reduce gaps, conflicts, and redundancies
Environment
• Integration of water planning with GMA requirements
Annexations
• Annexation reform focused on reducing conflicts, clarifying the role of special districts,
and providing for the fiscal sustainability of counties
Transportation
• Incentives for multi-modal transportation in Urban Growth Areas (UGAs)
• Linking WA State Transportation Plan with GMA goals
• Integration of state highways into GMA concurrency system
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 35
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix A: Project Framework and Path to Success (Project
Deliverable 1)
LEGISLATIVE REPORT – PREPARED FOR 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION 36
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
Framework Purpose ............................................................................................................. 38
Project goals, deliverables, and schedule ............................................................................. 40
Introduction and Goals...................................................................................... 40
Deliverables ...................................................................................................... 41
Schedule ........................................................................................................... 42
Project Management and Internal Communication .............................................................. 42
External Communication – Engagement Plan ...................................................................... 44
Expectations and keys to success ........................................................................................ 45
Projects Risks and Mitigation ............................................................................................... 45
Appendix A – Scope of work and deliverables...................................................................... 47
Appendix B - Project Schedule ............................................................................................. 52
Appendix C – Engagement Plan ........................................................................................... 53
Appendix D – Project status update document template ..................................................... 63
Appendix E – Kickoff meeting notes .................................................................................... 64
Cover Photo Credit: LDC, Inc.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 38
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Framework purpose
Excerpt from Engrossed Substitute
The Collaborative Roadmap Phase III (Phase III) project Senate Bill (ESSB) 5092:
will build upon the findings, concepts, and [Commerce is] to convene a task
recommendations in recent state-funded reports to force to make recommendations
make recommendations to the Legislature on reforms to regarding needed reforms to the
the state’s growth policy framework. state’s growth policy framework […].
The process will build upon the
During this phase of work, a task force will make findings, concepts, and
recommendations to the Legislature prior to the 2022 recommendations in recent state-
funded reports […]. The task force
and 2023 legislative sessions. Task force participants
must involve diverse perspectives
will represent a broad range of perspectives. Project including but not limited to
engagement will also include a special focus on Tribes representatives of counties, cities,
and the lived experiences and perspectives of people special districts, the real estate,
and communities who have too often been excluded building, and agricultural industries,
from public policy decision-making and who are planning and environmental
organizations, tribal governments,
unevenly impacted by those decisions.
and state agencies. Special effort
To build a strong foundation for the Phase III project, the must be made to include in these
discussions the lived experiences
project team has developed the Project Framework and
and perspectives of people who
Path to Success. This includes a project framework and have too often been excluded from
engagement plan that will provide a set of guideposts to public policy decision-making and
ensure project deliverables and expectations are met unevenly impacted by those
and that the project is a success. decisions.
ESSB 5092, p. 64-65
The purpose of this is to:
✓ Provide a background and foundation for the project
✓ Outline project goals and objectives
✓ Provide a project schedule
✓ Establish a detailed plan for engagement
✓ Identify communication protocols, contacts and responsible parties between the
project team and Commerce
✓ Outline keys to the overall success of the project
✓ Identify potential project risks upfront and strategies to address risk
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 39
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Project goals, deliverables and schedule
Introduction and goals
Commerce and the consulting team prepared a scope of work (SOW) for this project, attached
as Appendix A. The SOW provides details about the tasks, deliverables, timelines and
expectations for the project. In addition, Commerce and the consultants participated in a
kickoff meeting on August 19, 2021. One of the purposes of that meeting was to understand
and further refine the project goals, vision and internal communication protocols for the
project. A copy of the kickoff meeting notes is provided in Appendix E.
The goal for this project is to convene a task force to make recommendations on needed
reforms to Washington’s growth policy framework to the Washington State Legislature prior to
the 2022 and 2023 legislative sessions. In addition to the task force, the project will include
early and continuous engagement with Tribes, other interested parties, legislators, and people
and communities who have been left out of public policy decision-making and who are
unevenly impacted by those decisions. The process for accomplishing these engagement
goals is outlined in the engagement plan.
For this project to achieve the desired outcomes, the consulting team will monitor, measure
and report the steps outlined within the scope of work and engagement plan (Appendix C) to
Commerce. In addition to this Project Framework and Path to Success, the consulting team will
submit regular project progress reports to Commerce and have continual coordination on
project deliverables and engagement.
As we initiate engagement, the project team expects to further refine objectives and desired
outcomes. The Phase III project will run through June of 2023 and includes seven deliverables
and a concurrent engagement strategy. The final closeout report and final set of
recommendations will support work continuing beyond the project’s formal timeframe.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 40
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Deliverables
Additional details on the tasks and deliverables are outlined in the adopted SOW (Appendix A)
and the project schedule (Appendix B). The following is a high-level summary of deliverables
and timeframes for each.
Deliverables Timeframe Overview of deliverables
Deliverable 1: August 20 – • Kickoff meeting with Commerce
Project Framework September 15, • Project charter
and Path to Success 2021 • Engagement plan
Deliverable 2: August 20 – • Analysis and synthesis of prior studies
Review of Prior September 15, identified by Commerce
Studies and 2021 • Review of existing legislation
Findings • Initial outline of opportunities for 2022
session
Deliverable 3: August 20 – • Preparation of report that identifies
Preliminary Scope October 15, proposed scope of preliminary project
of 2021 recommendations
Recommendations
Report
Deliverable 4: Draft October 1 – • Preparation of a 2022 legislative
and Final Legislative December 15, recommendation chapter
Report 2021 • Summary of 2021 engagement
Deliverable 5: Final March 15 – • Succinct report that updates the information
Scope and June 1, 2022 in Deliverable 3 and reflects actions taken
Recommendations during the 2022 legislative session
Report • Information and feedback from engagement
efforts
Deliverable 6: Draft October 15 – • Report on activities and recommendations
and Final Legislative December 15, prior to the 2023 legislative session
Report 2022 • Summarize 2022 engagement
Deliverable 7: April 15 – • Final report, including executive summary,
Closeout Report & June 15, 2022 project successes, process, and lessons
Final learned
Recommendations • Recommendations and issues for future
study
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 41
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Schedule
Work on this project is organized into four phases, organized around the 2022 and 2023
legislative sessions. The following provides a high-level overview of each phase. Specifics for
deliverables and engagement during each of these phases may be found in Appendices A and
C, respectively.
Phase 1: Kickoff, deliverables one through four and initial engagement (August 2021-January
2022)
• Commerce kickoff meeting
• Development of Deliverable 1: Project Framework and Path to Success (this document)
• Development of Deliverable 2: Review of Prior Studies and Findings
• Development of Deliverable 3: Preliminary Scope of Recommendations Report
• Engagement prior to the 2022 session – Form and engage task force for 2022
legislative session recommendations and engage legislators, Tribes, and other
interested groups, including people and communities who have too often been excluded
from public policy decision-making
• Preparation of Deliverable 4: Draft and Final Legislative Report
Phase 2: 2022 Legislative session (January-March 2022)
• Legislative engagement during 2022 legislative session
• Task force, Tribal, and other group engagement during legislative session
Phase 3: Post-2022 Legislative session (March 2022-January 2023)
• Deliverable 5: Final Scope and Recommendations Report following 2022 session
• Engagement prior to 2023 legislative session
• Deliverable 6: Draft and Final Legislative Report
Phase 4: 2023 Legislative Session, Project Closeout Report and Final Recommendations
(January-June 2023)
• Engagement during 2023 legislative session
• Deliverable 7: Closeout Report and Final Recommendations
Project Management and Internal Communication
The success of this project is built on a strong communication plan. For internal
communication, the project team proposes several measures to support strong coordination
and communication between the project team and Commerce, including:
• Identifying primary project contacts for both the project and Commerce teams
• Identifying project team members for both the project and Commerce teams
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 42
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• Building in time for Commerce review and comment on each project deliverable
• Developing standard communication protocols to ensure projects tasks and
deliverable deadlines are met, including:
o Submitting progress reports every two weeks as outlined in Appendix D
o Participating in regular project meetings, scheduled as needed
The project team members and primary contacts are:
Name Organization Title Contact
Dave Andersen* Department of Managing Director dave.andersen@commerce.wa.gov
Commerce
Dave Pringle Department of Policy Director dave.pringle@commerce.wa.gov
Commerce
Paul Johnson Department of Senior Planner paul.johnson@commerce.wa.gov
Commerce
Clay White+ LDC, Inc. Director of Planning cwhite@ldccorp.com
Matt Covert LDC, Inc. Planner mcovert@ldccorp.com
Brett Houghton** PRR Director bhoughton@prrbiz.com
Lauren Foster PRR Senior Consultant lfoster@prrbiz.com
Laura LaBissoniere PRR Associate Director llabissoniere@prrbiz.com
Miller of Community
Engagement
William Grimes* SCJ Alliance Principal bill.grimes@scjalliance.com
Rachelle Bradley SCJ Alliance Planner rachelle.bradley@scjalliance.com
Sasha Visconty* Confluence Senior Principal sasha.visconty@confenv.com
Environmental
Duana JMMK Law Partner kolouskova@jmmklaw.com
Koloušková*
*Commerce project lead
**Engagement lead
+Primary project contact and overall project lead
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 43
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
External communication – engagement plan
The project team has developed a separate engagement plan (Appendix C) for this project.
That plan includes time and investment consistent with how critical the involvement from the
task force, Tribes, legislative members, interested parties, and groups that have been
historically underrepresented and unevenly impacted by the state’s growth management
policies is to the success of the project.
External engagement is focused in five main areas:
• Task force. This is a group of not more than 12 individuals representing key
stakeholders, such as organizations representing marginalized communities, business
and building associations, state agencies, planning groups, environmental
organizations, local and regional governments and metropolitan planning organizations,
and Tribal governments.
• Tribes. Roadmap Phase III places a strong emphasis on Tribal engagement throughout
the project. The project team will develop this involvement iteratively in direct
collaboration with Tribal representatives.
• People and communities who have too often been excluded from public policy decision-
making and who have been unevenly impacted by those decisions. The project team is
prioritizing three seats on the task force to represent these groups and is working
collaboratively with groups representing people who have been historically
underrepresented in decision making to develop processes to ensure effective
opportunities to inform the task force recommendations.
• Other interested groups. These are audiences that may have a keen interest and stake
in one or more issue areas but will not necessarily participate in the technical process
of legislative and policy recommendations for the task force.
• Legislators. We will offer legislators multiple ways to participate in this process. We will
invite key members, including key committee chairs to attend task force meetings. We
will also offer one-on-one meetings for those who are unable to participate in task force
meetings.
The project team will work with Commerce to support all project materials being posted on the
project webpage. The project team explore the idea of developing a standalone site to use
throughout the project.
Brett Houghton, PRR, is the overall engagement lead. Sasha Visconty, Confluence
Environmental, is the Tribal engagement lead, and Clay White, LDC, is the legislative
engagement lead.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 44
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Expectations and keys to success
The project team has identified following factors necessary for project success:
• Build trust with those we engage with as part of this project.
• Provide clear, concise and consistent messaging.
• Establish common goals among the project team, task force members and other
involved parties.
• Strive to reach consensus on important recommendations where possible.
• Understand the project goals from the legislative perspective so recommendations
from the task force align with legislators’ expectations.
• Encourage participation from all affected groups, especially Tribes and other people
and communities who have too often been excluded from public policy decision-making
and who have been unevenly impacted by those decisions.
• Provide documents and deliverables that are easy to understand and tailored to target
audiences.
• Provide a clear and concise summary of past work to provide a strong foundation.
• Provide tangible recommendations through the task force to the Legislature.
• Ensure each of the project deliverables within the adopted Scope of Work is completed
as outlined and completed on time.
Project risk management
Clear and effective communication is one of the most effective ways to reduce risk and
minimize project adversity. This is particularly true for projects like this one that involve a
broad range of interests.
Risks and proposed strategies to reduce them include:
• Short time between project kickoff and 2022 legislative session. There is a tight
timeline and high expectations for the 2022 session to support passing legislation that
can be incorporated into comprehensive plan updates in our fastest-growing
jurisdictions (June 2024 comprehensive plan update). To minimize this risk, we
propose beginning the engagement process with interested legislators and potential
task force members concurrently with the preparation of deliverables one through
three. We will focus on legislation and ideas the legislature has considered previously
and engage key legislators early on their project expectations. We will also engage
Tribes and other interested groups, including people and communities who have too
often been excluded from public policy decision-making early so their voices will be
included in recommendations for the 2022 session.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 45
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• Meeting burnout. Legislators and several potential task force members have spent a
great deal of time and energy in the past three years on issues we are exploring through
this effort. Many will likely have been involved in the Road Map and Framework
projects, as well as the many land use bills legislators have introduced during the past
several legislative sessions. To minimize this risk, we will:
o clearly communicate project goals and objectives upfront,
o refrain from setting task force meetings during the sessions,
o plan task force meeting agendas in advance,
o keep the task force as small as possible so the meetings will be productive
o create several different engagement pathways to ensure all voices are heard
and individuals can participate at the level that works for them, and
o create several options for interested legislators to participate outside of
session.
• Lack of clear direction for the task force on the scope of issues to consider when
forming recommendations for reforms to the state’s growth policy framework. ESSB
ESSB 5092 provided that “[Commerce]…convene a task force to make
recommendations regarding needed reforms to the state’s growth policy framework
[…].” However, the perspectives of legislators and task force members regarding the
scope and scale of needed reforms and breadth of recommendations might be vastly
different. The 2022 legislative session could focus more on existing legislation and
issues identified through engagement as being critically important for the upcoming
session and then provide for several months of work by the task force leading up to the
2023 session. To minimize this risk, we will create a strong foundation and
understanding for the scope and breadth of issues to be considered early in the project
to help ensure recommendations brought forward align with the expectations of the
Legislature for specific issues to be addressed. Part of this includes providing realistic
expectations of the scope of work that can be accomplished, especially in the 2022
legislative session, as well as developing clear parameters on the scope of potential
reforms in the 2023 session well in advance.
• Lack of consensus on important recommendations. While consensus is not required to
make recommendations, when it is reached, legislation is typically more successful.
Given the breadth of statutes and issues, as well as the number of interested parties,
there is often not enough time to work through the issues in a satisfactory way.
Additionally, some groups have high subject matter and technical expertise in growth
management issues, while many more have a strong interest in one or more issues but
lack the technical expertise to address changes in statute in a systematic way. This is
particularly a risk when it comes to getting meaningful engagement from historically
underrepresented groups. This can create a scenario where not everyone’s needs are
met. To minimize this risk, we have designed a process that is focused on engaging the
Tribes specifically, provides for a task force as well as engagement focused on other
interested groups, and provides multiple options for legislators to participate.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 46
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix A – Scope of work and deliverables
Deliverable 1: Project Framework and Path to Success
Task timeline: August 20 - September 15, 2021
Objective: Prepare a draft and final project charter and engagement plan that will provide a
solid set of guideposts that will ensure project success.
Anticipated efforts:
• The Project Framework and Path to Success will detail the project purpose,
background, goals, approach, deliverables, opportunities for success, and project risks
and mitigation for those risks. In addition, a detailed project schedule for all tasks and
deliverables will be included. The framework will clearly outline project team roles and
how communication will occur between the project team and Commerce. We will frame
this approach around the process that will work most effectively for Commerce. The
framework is intended to be a living document that will help ensure project goals are
met and that the project team and Commerce are in lock step throughout the project.
• The framework will also include a separate engagement plan chapter. This will formally
outline our engagement approach, timelines and methods for engagement, and goals
for each of our outlined efforts. This includes the legislature, the task force, Tribal
engagement, and outreach to other interested groups.
• We anticipate preparation of a draft and final Project Framework and Path to Success
and engagement plan, which will allow Commerce time to review and comment.
Deliverable 2: Review of Prior Studies and Findings
Task timeline: August 20 - September 15, 2021
Objective: Review, consolidate, and make recommendations to leverage and utilize past work
as part of this project's efforts.
Anticipated efforts:
• Review of prior studies and findings. The review will include studies identified by
Commerce in the RFP.
• This task will also look at opportunities that lie in legislation that has been introduced
during the past few legislative sessions. There are many bills covering the statutes
being reviewed under this project where there could be opportunities. Some of the bills
were a result of past reports, and some developed outside of those processes. This
effort will assist as we make recommendations as part of Deliverable 3.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 47
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• The report will break down findings by statute so there is a comprehensive list of ideas.
Categorizing them will help break them down into sizeable issues, and we will cross
reference them when a change in one statute relates to a possible change in another
statute. As an example, changing GMA Comprehensive Plan timelines could correspond
with changes in the Shoreline Management Act. This will allow us to best leverage past
efforts.
• Based on the above analysis, we will provide initial recommendations.
• We anticipate preparation of a draft and final report, which will allow Commerce time for
input prior to issuing a final document. This will be a tight timeline, however, given the
final report is due approximately 30 days after the project commences.
Deliverable 3: Preliminary Scope of Recommendations Report
Task timeline: August 20 - October 15, 2021
Objective: Building off Deliverable 2, identify the proposed scope of recommendations
identified for the 2022 legislative report. This task will also identify issues that are proposed to
be addressed during the 2023 session.
Anticipated efforts:
• Building off Deliverable 2, a report will be prepared that identifies the proposed scope
of recommendations identified for the 2022 legislative report.
• The Report can be utilized as engagement occurs with key legislators and the task
force prior to the 2022 legislative session. This engagement will identify anything that
changes in term of recommendations that comes from initial engagement.
• As noted in Deliverable 2, the report will break issues down by statute and identify if the
issue is recommended to be addressed during the 2022 or 2023 session. Given the
timeframe leading up to the 2022 session, it is anticipated that most of the issues
recommended for 2022 will be those where 1) They are well fleshed out ideas, 2) Are
bills that were introduced in 2021 and will be re-introduced, or 3) issues that key
legislators or task force members believe are critical issues to be addressed during the
2022 session.
• The report will identify that the recommendations may be modified between the time
this report is issued and when the report on activities and recommendations is issued in
December, prior to the 2022 session.
• We anticipate preparation of a draft and final report that will allow Commerce time for
input before issuing a final document.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 48
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Deliverable 4: Preparation of Draft and Final Legislative Report
Task timeline: October 15 - November 15, 2021, Draft Report; November 16 - December 15,
2021, Final Report
Objective: Preparation of a draft and final report on activities and recommendations prior to the
2022 legislative session. The Draft Report is due November 15th, and the final report is due in
December, prior to the legislative session.
Anticipated efforts:
• Create an easy to navigate report so interested readers can easily find the information
they are looking for. This includes an executive summary of issues and quick links from
the Table of Contents to report elements. We will emphasize the engagement strategy
and the approach to the 2022 and 2023 sessions so readers can understand current
recommendations in context with the entire project.
• A 2022 legislative recommendation chapter will be provided that will outline
recommendations by topic and statute.
• 2021 engagement summary from engagement activities prior to the 2022 legislative
session will be provided so interested readers can see the progress made thus far and
the approach moving forward.
• The report will contain the reports and information from Deliverables 1-3 as summary
documents. As outlined above, we will pull out key information into the executive
summary.
• Our team will be available to present this report or meet with legislators on key issues.
Deliverable 5: Final Scope and Recommendations Report
Task timeline: March 11 - June 1, 2022
Objective: Create a succinct report that updates the preliminary report in Deliverable 3 to include
actions taken during the legislative session and information gathered during engagement
efforts.
Anticipated efforts:
• Update preliminary report to reflect actions taken during legislative session
• Include information and feedback provided as part of engagement efforts
• As part of this process, reach out to key legislative members for one-on-one meetings
as necessary. The goal would be to frame up issues that should be considered and
developed for the 2023 session based upon what occurred during the 2022 session.
• A Draft and Final report will be produced so Commerce can provide comments and
feedback prior to finalization.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 49
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• If the Legislative session ends on time, we aim to get this report finalized prior to June
30. Our goal would be June 1. Having this report complete will allow us to move forward
with the task force to prepare for the 2023 legislative session. There could be an
opportunity to gain additional time.
• All meetings include preparation of agenda/goals, meeting materials, and meeting
summaries.
Deliverable 6: Preparation of Draft and Final Legislative Report
Task timeline: October 15 - November 15, 2022, Draft Report; November 16 - December 15,
2022, Final Report
Objective: Preparation of a draft and final report on activities and recommendations prior to the
2022 legislative session. The Draft Report is due November 15, and the final report is due in
December, prior to the legislative session.
Anticipated efforts:
• Create an easy to navigate report so interested readers can easily find the information
they are looking for. This includes an executive summary of issues and quick links from
the Table of Contents to report elements. A 2023 legislative recommendation chapter
will be provided that will outline recommendations by topic and statute. The report will
clearly identify new or modified issues or recommendations that were not identified in
Deliverable 5 and that have resulted from engagement efforts.
• 2022 engagement summary from engagement after the 2022 legislative session will be
provided.
• Our team will be available to present this report or meet with legislators on key issues.
Deliverable 7: Closeout Report and Final Recommendations
Task timeline: April 24 - June 15, 2023
Objective: Create a succinct and easy to utilize final report that summarizes efforts of the
project and outlines recommendations and identifies issues for further work and study.
Anticipated efforts:
• Easy to navigate report so interested readers can easily find the information they are
looking for. This includes an executive summary of issues and quick links from the
Table of Contents to report elements.
• Chapter created to outline the project successes, process, and lessons learned that
may be utilized for future efforts. Chapter will include summary of issues introduced,
progress in creating legislation, and engagement processes utilized.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 50
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• A second Chapter will be prepared outlining recommendations and issues for further
work and study. We will break down the issues so this work can easily be transferred to
future efforts. As an example, we would outline bills that were introduced and that will
come back during the next session. Where possible, we can identify issues that led to
the bill not passing so changes can be considered for the next session. Where ideas
and recommendations did not lead to legislation, we will also pull those issues out for
future consideration. We will tie our robust engagement process into a list of
recommendations that Tribes and other interested parties would like to see addressed.
Lastly, the report will connect with past studies and efforts for the report to connect all
the work that was completed before this effort.
• We anticipate preparation of a draft and final report, which will allow Commerce time
for input prior to issuing a final document.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 51
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix B - Project Schedule
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 52
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix C – Engagement Plan
Background
The Washington State Department of Commerce is gathering input from diverse groups of
people across the state to recommend changes to Washington’s growth management
framework. This set of laws guide growth and development and include the Growth
Management Act, State Environmental Policy Act, Shoreline Management Act, and other
statues related to growth, change, economic development, housing, social equity and
environmental conservation.
Historically, Washington’s land use policy has not reflected the needs of people with low
incomes, people who are older, people who use languages other than English, people who are
Black, Indigenous, and people of color, people who live in rural areas, and people who rent their
homes.
In 2020, the Legislature issued a proviso in ESSB 5092 directing Commerce to engage diverse
audiences in developing recommendations for legislative change to Washington’s growth
management framework. The goal of this process is to identify systems and structures that
support land use that better serve diverse groups of people throughout Washington, especially
people who have historically been overlooked in planning land use policies.
Key audiences
Our approach is grounded in identifying and including diverse perspectives in the Washington
State Environmental Justice Task Force final report. This process will include the following
audiences:
• Tribes
• Agricultural industries
• Cities
• Community-based organizations that represent people with low incomes, people who
are older, people who use languages other than English, people who are Black,
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 53
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Indigenous, and people of color, people who live in rural areas, and people who rent
their homes.
• Counties
• Environmental organizations
• Housing organizations
• Legislators
• Planning organizations such as PSRC and APA
• Real estate and building developers
• Representatives from the legal community
• Special districts (including school districts and utilities)
• State agencies such as Ecology and Fish and Wildlife
See Appendix 1 of this engagement plan for a full contact list.
Engagement process
Our engagement process provides multiple opportunities for key audiences to participate and
influence decision making.
• Prior to 2022 session:
o Reach out to key legislators to confirm understanding. Engage members to
discuss legislation introduced during 2021 session and gather ideas to refine
legislation for the 2022 session, then share those ideas with the task force. This
will include addressing Growth Management Act bills before local jurisdictions
update their Comprehensive Plans by 2024.
o Reach out to Tribal governments to introduce the process and collaborate with
them on how to best engage them.
o Identify potential task force members and invite them to join the task force. The
task force will submit initial recommendations in a report to the Legislature
during the 2022 legislative session. This set of initial recommendations will
reflect preliminary input from Tribal governments and other interested parties.
o Reach out to potential partners to recommend task force members who
represent groups historically left out of conversations on these topics and for
recommendations to refine the approach to include those voices.
o With partners, develop general structure to engage other interested parties,
either groups or individuals, in working groups by topic and by community
throughout the process.
• During the 2022 session:
o Hold presentations for key legislators and task force members, attend meetings
and work with key stakeholders on active legislation as it works through the
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 54
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
committee process. This includes sharing the 2022 legislative report and
recommendations.
• After the 2022 session:
o Share legislative report for the task force, Tribal governments and other
interested parties to summarize outcomes of the 2022 legislative session.
o Convene the task force at least three times to discuss focused topics to inform
recommendations.
o Have one-on-one and small group conversations with task force members to
talk through concerns and interests between meetings to support more effective
decision making and collaboration at meetings.
o Convene working groups, which may include:
▪ Ongoing subcommittee of organizations representing people who have
been historically left out of growth management and land use
conversations
▪ A series of one-off time meetings with local jurisdictions focused on
specific topics like climate change and the environment, zoning, and land
use
▪ A series of one-off meetings with representatives from agricultural
industries, environmental organizations, housing organizations, planning
organizations such as PSRC and APA, real estate and building
developers, representatives from the legal community focused on
specific topics like climate change and the environment, zoning and land
use
▪ A series of one-off time meetings with special districts (including school
districts and utilities) focused on specific topics like climate change and
the environment, zoning, and land use
▪ One-time meetings with state agencies such as Ecology and Fish and
Wildlife focused on specific topics of interest to those groups
o Work with legislators to get early feedback on ideas and recommendations for
new legislation. The task force will consider these ideas to develop
recommendations for the 2023 session.
• During the 2023 session:
o Hold presentations for key legislators and task force members, attend meetings
and work with key stakeholders on active legislation as it works through the
committee process. This includes sharing the 2022 legislative report and
recommendations.
• Develop final report and recommendations as a guide for legislation that is not
introduced during the 2022 or 2023 sessions.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 55
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Engaging Tribal governments
Our approach to working with Tribal governments will be responsive, flexible and transparent.
We will meet them where they want to meet us, physically and topically. This might look like:
• Engaging Tribal staff and technical and policy staff in working groups
• Bringing together multiple Tribal staff to discuss various topics of their choosing
• Individual meetings with individual staff on the topics that matter to them (they choose)
We will reach out to every Tribe in Washington, including both federally recognized Tribes and
non-federally recognized Tribes.
As we start this work, the Commerce Tribal Liaison position is vacant. The consultant team will
collaborate with the Commerce Tribal Liaison when that position is filled, in addition to
coordination with the Governor’s Office of Indian Affairs (GOIA) and other related agencies.
When this position is filled, our team will work closely with the new Tribal Liaison to adjust our
approach based on their recommendations. These relationships are sensitive, and we will want
to add value to the Commerce relationship, not displace it.
Generally, we expect Tribal outreach to include:
• Initial engagement in fall 2021, in advance of the 2022 legislative session, to gather as
much information as possible to share with the Task Force to inform their initial
recommendations. This may include Tribal representation in topical working groups
that advise the Task Force.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 56
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• In spring 2022, share a report of what happened in the legislative session, including a
summary of our outreach and how the Task Force recommendations included or
responded to Tribal requests and input. This will include next steps and personal
contact as appropriate to coordinate with their ongoing involvement, including any
changes to how they are engaging.
• In summer and fall 2022, engage Tribes consistent with their stated priorities and
preferences, providing them opportunities to address the topics that are most relevant
to them and inform the Task Force’s recommendations for the 2023 session.
• In spring 2023, a legislative memorandum with similar content and structure to the
2022 memorandum, with an emphasis on additional input from Tribes.
Initial contact
In early- to mid-September 2021 we will send an introductory letter to the Chair of every Tribe
in Washington to let them know this process has started and that the team will provide more
detailed information as it develops.
In mid- to late-October, we will follow up with Tribal contacts, to share a roadmap graphic to
everyone on the list and ask about each Tribe’s interest in engaging, including the intensity and
level of effort. This communication will provide more information about the existing options for
involvement and state that Commerce and the Task Force are flexible in their approach to
engagement.
This outreach may include phone calls or emails where we have existing relationships,
especially when the Tribe has provided a specific staff contact for this work. We will send
letters to those Tribes where we do not have existing relationships and have not heard back
from the Tribes with a specific contact.
Documentation
We will track all Tribal personnel changes and communication efforts. The Tribes’ requests
and recommendations will be documented. An annual memorandum will describe how their
input was used or addressed in Task Force recommendations.
Other interested groups
We will start by engaging people who have not participated in past Growth Management Act
update efforts about their priorities, needs and perspectives. We will do one-on-one interviews
and host listening circles and community conversations to learn where we need to focus are
and how we can center the needs of people who have been marginalized by land use policy.
The listening circles are where community members will have opportunities to share and where
Commerce and members of the Task Force will focus on listening. We will stay in touch with
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 57
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
these groups throughout the process based on the feedback we receive during our initial
outreach.
Task Force
We will convene a task force to engage throughout the life of this process. To support effective
decision making and collaboration, the task force membership will be focused, to include no
more than 12 individuals.
The task force will include key stakeholders, such as organizations representing marginalized
communities (such as Got Green, Washington Community Action Network, Front and
Centered), business and building associations (such as Building Industry Association of
Washington, Realtors, Association of Washington Business), Washington State agencies (such
as Ecology, Fish and Wildlife, Health, Transportation, Commerce), planning groups like the
American Planning Association, environmental organizations (such as Futurewise and the
Washington Environmental Council), local and regional governments and metropolitan planning
organizations (Washington State Association of Counties, Association of Washington Cities,
Puget Sound Regional Council), and Tribal governments.
We will start by holding one-on-one meetings with potential task force members and four task
force meetings from October through December 2021 to learn about their key issues and
interests and share feedback from legislative engagement.
We will engage the task force again in spring 2022 to discuss new ideas and recommendations
for legislation in 2023. We expect to convene the task force at least ten times prior to the 2023
legislative session to discuss focused topics to inform recommendations. These details,
including a schedule, will be revisited in spring 2022 to confirm direction.
Legislative engagement
We will offer legislators multiple ways to participate in this process. We will invite key
members, including key committee chairs, to attend task force meetings. We will also offer
one-on-one meetings for those who are unable to participate in task force meetings. Our plan
includes:
• Prior to 2022 session: Engage members to discuss legislation introduced during 2021
session and gather ideas to refine legislation for the 2022 session, then share those
ideas with the task force. This will include addressing Growth Management Act bills
before local jurisdictions update their Comprehensive Plans by 2024.
• During the 2022 session: Hold presentations, attend meetings and work with
stakeholders on active legislation as it works through the committee process. This
includes sharing the 2022 legislative report and recommendations.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 58
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• After the 2022 session: Work with legislators to get early feedback on ideas and
recommendations for new legislation. The task force will consider these ideas to
develop recommendations for the 2023 session.
• During the 2023 session: Hold presentations, attend meetings and work with
stakeholders on active legislation as it works through the committee process. This
includes sharing the 2022 legislative report and recommendations.
• Develop final report and recommendations as a guide for legislation that is not
introduced during the 2022 or 2023 sessions.
Project website
We will work with Commerce to ensure project documents are available on a website to
provide clear and easy-to-understand information about the framework, including project
timeline, key deliverables and contact information.
Work plan
Timeframe Task Activity Description
August Engagement plan Draft engagement plan
September Task force Reach out to potential
task force members
Tribal engagement Send letter to every Let them know the
Tribe in Washington process has started
and that the team
will provide more
detailed
information as it is
developed.
Interested parties Hold one-on-one Task force
interviews members focus on
listening to other
interested parties
Legislative Engage legislators
engagement
Tribal engagement Phone calls or emails
to share roadmap
graphic and ask about
Tribe’s interest in
engaging in process.
October Task force Task force meeting #1
Legislative report Draft legislative report
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 59
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Timeframe Task Activity Description
Review legislative
report
November 15, 2021 Legislative report Submit draft legislative
report
Task force meetings
#2 and 3
December 15, 2021 Legislative report Task force meeting #4
Submit final legislative
report
Task force Communicate with
task force during
session
May 2022 Task force Task force meeting #5 Prepare for next
legislative session
Develop report and
recommendations
Summer and Fall Task force Convene task force at
2022 least nine times
Tribal engagement One-on-one follow-up to confirm ongoing
engagement
Task force and Hold one-on-one Task force
interested parties interviews and members focus on
listening sessions listening to other
interested parties
Other interested Hold one-on-one
parties interviews and
listening sessions
Legislative Engage legislators
engagement
Appendix 1: Contact List
Group Contact name and Contact information Consultant team
title contact
Legislators Duerr, Davina Davina.Duerr@leg.wa.gov
(land use focus) Goehner, Keith Keith.Goehner@leg.wa.gov
Fitzgibbon, Joe joe.fitzgibbon@leg.wa.gov
Pollet, Gerry gerry.pollet@leg.wa.gov
Kuderer, Patricia Patricia.Kuderer@leg.wa.gov
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 60
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Group Contact name and Contact information Consultant team
title contact
Salomon, Jesse Jesse.salomon@leg.wa.gov
Barkis, Andrew andrew.barkis@leg.wa.gov
Short, Shelly shelly.short@leg.wa.gov
Lovelett, Liz Liz.Lovelett@leg.wa.gov
Legislators Gregerson, Mia Mia.gregerson@leg.wa.gov
(environmental Johnson, Jesse Jesse.johnson@leg.wa.gov
justice focus) Morgan, Melanie Melanie.morgan@leg.wa.gov
Hasegawa, Bob Bob.hasegawa@leg.wa.gov
Saldana, Rebecca Rebecca.saldana@leg.wa.gov
Nguyen, Joe Joe.nguyen@leg.wa.gov
Legislative staff Popovac, Brandon Brandon.Popovac@leg.wa.gov
Wright, Kellen Kellen.Wright@leg.wa.gov
Mahgoub, Noha Noha.Mahgoub@leg.wa.gov
Richartz, Saundra Saundra.Richartz@leg.wa.gov
Hatfield, Robert Robert.Hatfield@leg.wa.gov
Olsen, Jeff jeff.olsen@leg.wa.gov
Tribes
Other interested
parties
Task force
members
State Agencies Ecology
Fish and Wildlife
Health
Transportation
Planning and American Planning
environmental Association
organizations
Futurewise
Washington
Environmental
Council
Business Building Industry
associations Assn. Washington
Association of
Washington
Business
Washington
Association of
Realtors
Farm Bureau
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 61
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Group Contact name and Contact information Consultant team
title contact
Local & Regional Association of
Governments Washington Cities
Washington State
Association of
Counties
WA Public Ports
Association
WA Association of
Sewer & Water
Districts
Chelan/Douglas
RTPO
PSRC
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 62
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix D – Project status update document template
Collaborative Roadmap Status Update
Current Deliverables: Dates Covered:
Status:
Current Tasks in Progress: Information Needed from Commerce:
• •
• •
• •
General Notes:
Expected Actions for Next 2 Weeks:
•
•
Completed Tasks/Deliverables:
Status Symbol Legend:
Green: Finished - X
Yellow: In Progress/Needs Review - X
Red: Not Started - X
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 63
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix E – Kickoff meeting notes
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III RECOMMENDATIONS
Project kick-off meeting
Notes
Date: Monday, August 16, 2021
Location: Teams
Attendance: Commerce: Dave Anderson, Paul Johnson, Dave Pringle, Amelia Veneziano
LDC: Matt Covert, Clay White
Confluence: Sasha Visconty
PRR: Brett Houghton
SCJ Alliance: Bill Grimes
Time: 9:00 a.m. – 10:30 a.m.
ITEM
Project schedule
• High level review of the entire schedule
• Focused attention between now and the end of the year (deliverables 1-4)
o Deliverables 1 and 2 due September 15
o Deliverable 2
▪ Review Land Use Commission, Governors Land Use Agenda, Road Map, and Updating
Washington’s Land Use Framework documents and reports.
▪ Review active legislation that may be worth revisiting or may be coming back this year.
Include table by statute and topic.
o Draft documents of deliverables 1 and 2 to Commerce by September 3, Commerce provides by
September 9
o Deliverable 3 due by October 15
▪ Clay will coordinate with Commerce on date to deliver draft to Commerce to review
o Deliverable 4 provide draft by November 15, final by December 15
o Clay will set up meetings with legislators and potential Task Force members to get feedback and
insight on where things stand now
▪ Include a meeting with legislators in the first 60 days
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 64
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
▪ Include meetings with potential Task Force members in first 60 days
• All the things the team is working on at once in the beginning is a constraint for the early engagement
• The team will reconvene on September 7 to talk through initial engagement with legislators
▪ Dave A. will send Land Use Commission and Governors Land Use Agenda reports
(completed).
▪ Project team will send Commerce drafts for Deliverables 1 and 2 by September 3.
▪ Commerce will send feedback on drafts by September 9.
▪ Clay will send final documents on September 15 per the project schedule.
Communications protocols
• Internal
o Consultant team primary point of contact - Clay
o Commerce primary point of contact - Dave A.
▪ For emails, copy Paul and Dave P.
o Dave P. and Paul will look into filing sharing and project management platforms available to
Commerce employees; some things to consider:
▪ Workflow: version control, consistency of comments
▪ Some options might be Teams, Box, SharePoint
▪ Commerce will create a shared document library through an FTP site or similar while
SharePoint system is resolved
▪ Naming conventions: 20210915 Framework and Path to Success - Draft
• External:
o Amelia is the point of contact for Commerce editorial and branding guidelines; she will share
existing document about this
o The voice of the recommendations will be the Task Force and the consultants on the review of
prior studies
o Developing lists of potential members and partners
▪ Dave A. and Clay will have conversation about “usual suspects”
o Consultant team members can reach out directly to potential task force members
o Commerce recommends developing ground rules for participation in the task force:
▪ What are our expectations for participants who are representing a particular community?
Including how they reach out to their communities
▪ Dave and Clay will discuss more in a couple days before we contact people
o Communication protocols with Tribes
▪ Commerce does not currently have a Tribal liaison
▪ Dave A. will reach out to Ernie Rasmussen, the former liaison who still works at
Commerce in a different capacity, to see if he is available and willing to connect with
Sasha
▪ Dave A. will also reach out to Ben Serr, Eastern Regional Manager for Commerce, who
has some Eastern Washington relationships that might be helpful
▪ The first step will be a formal letter from Commerce to Tribal Chairs copying planning
directors, inviting participation; this will be a high-level welcome letter saying, “here’s
what we are doing, we would love to have your involvement, we will be in touch soon”
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 65
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
▪ Sasha will start drafting the letter, and will coordinate with Dave P. on the mailing list and
sending it out
• Sasha will also reach out to the Governor’s Office of Indian Affairs (GOIA)
Prioritizing hard to reach audiences
• Commerce will be subject to Healthy Environment for All (HEAL) Act
• Commerce tends to go to local elected officials, so if there are groups not well represented by local
elected officials. Commerce thinks the people who will be hardest to engage are those who are poorly
represented by local power structure, including people who don’t own property, people with low incomes,
and people who use languages other than English
Commerce overall project goals
• Commerce wants to identify substantive things that need to change; two big underlying structural issues
that need to be addressed are:
o There is a lot of dissatisfaction with SEPA, now do we address those and ensure Tribes have
protection for cultural resources; and
o The whole process of connecting financial viability of capital facilities with entitlements process
needs investigation
Commerce first session goals
• Most important things for first legislative session:
o Legislature has measure of confidence that things are on track and that the stakeholders aren’t in
open revolt;
o Washington’s growth management framework has not been a broad-based conversation and we
are directly addressing this; and
o The Legislature sees how the work we are doing helps set them up going into the session in
terms of the actual bills. (GMA has been a free-for-all without enough time to collaborate and
work together; we want to show we can distill the community of practice around land use into a
vetted set of reforms.)
To support the goals, Commerce suggests:
• Identify criteria for evaluation, suggestions, or criteria, including asking:
o What’s ripe?
o What is the low-hanging fruit (easy wins to build momentum)?
o What issues help make other issues easier, or vice versa?
• Identify the behavior to change, and work backward:
o Is the RCW the next thing that has to change to make the behavior change?
• Manage expectations for 2022 session: we are unlikely to get meaningful, deep engagement from people
who’ve not been involved in the past ahead of 2022
o Frame this as a down payment on next session. Demonstrate how we will do more for 2023.
Commerce second session goals
• Given that it takes people a long time to meaningfully engage in conversation, input from groups who’ve
been historically underserved will be most impactful in the second session.
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 66
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• Dave A. will check in with Dave P. about who the specific people are in the Legislature who are passionate
about the inclusive engagement and share the list with Brett and Clay.
Immediate next steps
• Clay White will set follow up meeting for review of draft deliverables 1 and 2, 90 minutes to talk about
the deliverables and engagement (meeting set for 9/7)
• Commerce will send consultants materials today as needed via email in advance of a more formal
system
• Dave P. will identify a file sharing system that Commerce staff can use
• Clay and the consultant team will review prior reports to assess if there any unfinished business,
anything that was pursued that flopped to answer the questions. What did we learn last time we
looked at this issue?
• Dave A. sent bcc email to everyone involved last time announcing project team, will share that list
with Clay
• Clay will follow up with Dave A. on specific people and what they are looking for
• Dave A. will check in with Dave P. about specific legislators who are passionate about the inclusive
engagement and share the list with Brett and Clay
APPENDIX A: PROJECT FRAMEWORK AND PATH TO SUCCESS 67
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix B: Review of Prior Studies and Findings (Project
Deliverable 2)
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 68
Collaborative Roadmap Phase III
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
Executive summary ......................................................................................................... 71
Prior Studies Overview .................................................................................................... 74
Land Use Study Commission (1998) ......................................................................... 84
Overview .............................................................................................................. 84
Conclusions and Lessons Learned ...................................................................... 86
Governor’s Land Use Agenda (2006) ......................................................................... 88
Overview .............................................................................................................. 88
Conclusions and Lessons Learned ...................................................................... 88
A Road Map to Washington’s Future (2019) .............................................................. 90
Overview .............................................................................................................. 90
Conclusions and Lessons Learned ...................................................................... 94
Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework (2021) ......................................... 95
Overview .............................................................................................................. 95
Conclusions and Lessons Learned ...................................................................... 98
Leveraging Legislative Efforts to Implement Recommendations .................................... 99
Successful Legislation – 2020 and 2021 Legislative Sessions.................................. 99
Pending Legislation – 2021 Legislative Session ..................................................... 100
Appendix A –A Road Map to Washington’s Future Recommendations ......................... 107
Appendix B – Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework Discussion Items ...... 123
Figures
Figure 1: Growth Policy Framework Primary Statutes ...................................................................... 71
Figure 2: Growth Policy Framework Additional Statutes .................................................................. 72
Figure 3: Four Prior Studies and Recent Legislation ......................................................................... 73
Figure 4: Overview of Roadmap Phase III Timeline and Process ..................................................... 73
Figure 5: Foundations of Phase III .................................................................................................... 74
Figure 6: Growth Policy Framework Recommendations and Opportunities ..................................... 83
Figure 7: Issues addressed in ESB 6094 (1996) ............................................................................... 85
Figure 8: Land Use Study Commission Lessons Learned ................................................................. 87
Figure 9: Governor’s Land Use Agenda Lessons Learned ................................................................ 89
Figure 10: Road Map Recommended Actions for Transformational and Systemic Change ............ 91
Figure 11: Road Map Recommendations for Improving the Existing Planning Framework ............. 93
Figure 12: Road Map Lessons Learned ............................................................................................. 94
Figure 13: Key Discussions from Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework ..................... 97
Figure 14: Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework Lessons Learned ............................. 98
Figure 15: Successful legislation during 2020 and 2021 sessions ................................................ 100
Figure 16: Relationship between past bills and 2022 legislative session. ..................................... 100
Figure 17: Overview of Relevant Legislation from 2021 Legislative Session ................................. 106
Cover Photo Credits, Top to Bottom: Sharesse Edie (CC License), GPA Photo Archive (CC License), King and Snohomish Counties,
CEBImagery (CC License)
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 70
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive summary
The Collaborative Roadmap Phase III (Phase III) Excerpt from Engrossed Substitute
project will build upon the findings, concepts, and Senate Bill (ESSB) 5092 (Operating
recommendations from recent state-funded reports. Budget):
The project team, working with the Department of
… for [Commerce] to convene a task
Commerce (Commerce), will convene a task force to
force to make recommendations
review the issues and make recommendations to the regarding needed reforms to the state’s
Washington State Legislature on proposed reforms to growth policy framework […]. The
Washington State’s growth policy framework during process will build upon the findings,
both the 2022 and 2023 legislative sessions. Past concepts, and recommendations in
reports, which include the Land Use Study recent state-funded reports […]. The
Commission (1998), Governor’s Land Use Agenda task force must involve diverse
(2006), A Road Map to Washington’s Future (2019), perspectives including but not limited
and Updating Washington’s Growth Policy to representatives of counties, cities,
special districts, the real estate,
Framework (2021) provide a foundation for the Phase
building, and agricultural industries,
III project. In response to direction in the State’s
planning and environmental
operating budget (ESSB 5092), this report identifies organizations, Tribal governments, and
and highlights recommendations that changed the state agencies. Special effort must be
growth policy framework or are currently being made to include in these discussions
considered by the Legislature. the lived experiences and perspectives
of people who have too often been
Washington State’s growth policy framework excluded from public policy decision-
consists of state laws that govern or influence the making and unevenly impacted by
strategies state agencies and local governments use those decisions.
to plan for, implement, and manage land use policy,
ESSB 5092, pg. 64 - 65
permitting and appeals, infrastructure, and
environmental protections. The primary laws that
guide our framework are identified in Figures 1 and 2.
Growth Policy Framework – primary statutes
Growth Management Act – RCW 36.70A
Shoreline Management Act – RCW 90.58
State Environmental Policy Act – RCW 43.21C
Local Project Review Act – RCW 36.70B
Land Use Petition Act – RCW 36.70C
Planning Enabling Act – RCW 36.70
Subdivision Statute – RCW 58.17
Figure 1: Growth Policy Framework Primary Statutes
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 71
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Growth Policy Framework – additional statutes
Water System Coordination Act – RCW School Districts – RCW 28A
70A.100
Regional Transportation Planning – RCW 47.80 Forest Practices – RCW 76.09
Interlocal Cooperation Act – RCW 39.34 Energy Facilities – RCW 80.50
City, Noncharter Code City, and County State Agencies and Universities – RCW 28B
Governance – RCW 35, 35A, 36 (higher ed) and RCW 43 (agencies)
Port Districts – RCW 53 Community Redevelopment Financing – RCW
39.89
Water and Sewer Districts – RCW 57 Multi-Family Property Tax Exemption – RCW
84.14
Public Utility Districts – RCW 54 Impact Fees – RCW 82.02
State Building Code – RCW 19.27
Figure 2: Growth Policy Framework Additional Statutes
To build upon past efforts and craft additional recommendations for changes to the growth
policy framework, the project team has review prior studies and findings from those studies.
This includes how best to leverage prior work as part of the Phase III project. The four previous
state-funded reports reviewed in this document include the Land Use Study Commission
(1998), Governor’s Land Use Agenda (2006), A Road Map to Washington’s Future (2019), and
Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework (2021).
Recommendations from past studies have resulted in successful legislation over the past 24
years. With renewed attention paid to updating the growth policy framework through the recent
Road Map to Washington’s Future and Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework
projects, additional legislation has been introduced to address recommendations and
opportunities identified within those reports over the past two legislative sessions. Additional
legislation has been introduced but has not been passed by the Legislature.
Those bills are likely to be reintroduced and provide a foundation on which to build for the 2022
and 2023 legislative sessions. This review of prior studies provides an overview of those bills
that have successfully passed because of recommendations from recent reports and those
that may be considered and leveraged going forward. This information will be used throughout
the Phase III project, but will be especially helpful as preliminary project recommendations and
a legislative report are produced prior to the 2022 session.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 72
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
This document also helps identify where
prior recommendations have been
addressed, what gaps remain, and the
prime opportunities for filling in those
gaps during the 2022 legislative session
(along with any other priorities identified
by the task force). Issues, opportunities
and gaps identified here will also help set
the stage for larger-scale updates and
recommendations, which will be provided
prior to the 2023 legislative session
(subject to the goals of the Legislature and
the recommendations coming out of the
task force and engagement process).
Figure 3: Four Prior Studies and Recent Legislation
This report, Review of Prior Studies and Findings (project deliverable 2), has been produced in
tandem with the Project Framework and Path to Success (project deliverable 1), which includes
an engagement plan. Together, the project team will use both project deliverables as initial
recommendations are made by the task force for the draft and final legislative report this fall
and as recommendations are made throughout the project. Figure 4 provides an overview of
the process and deliverables for the Phase III project.
Figure 4: Overview of Roadmap Phase III Timeline and Process
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 73
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Prior Studies Overview
Many of the recommendations of previous state-funded reports, including the Land Use Study
Commission (1998) and Governor’s Land Use Agenda (2006), have resulted in statutory
changes. More recent recommendations from A Road Map to Washington’s Future (2019) and
Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework (2021) have resulted in legislation that has
passed or been introduced over the past two legislative sessions. The Collaborative Roadmap
Phase III project will build upon these efforts.
Understanding the gap between previous recommendations and what has been addressed
through legislation (or pending legislation) can provide a strong foundation for
recommendations to be made as part of the Phase III project.
Figure 5: Foundations of Phase III
Figure 6, on the following page, provides a summary of the recommendations and discussion
topics from the Road Map and Framework projects, cross-tabulated with successful and
proposed legislation from the past two legislative sessions. The figure provides a clear
overview of where recommendations have been addressed or partially addressed in legislation,
where there are significant opportunities for making further progress in the 2022 session and
where gaps remain that could be the subject of a more comprehensive set of reforms in the
2023 session. Additional detailed information regarding past studies and legislation is
provided in subsequent sections of this report.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 74
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating WA's
Growth Policy
Roadmap to WA's Future Framework
Recommendations Discussion Topics Successful Legislation Proposed Legislation
HB 1337 - 2021-22
Provide General Fund distribution to incentivize
cities and counties to adopt accessory dwelling unit
(ADU) policies
Funding and Revenue Generation Cycle for updating &
Enhancing state funding and creation dedicated funding HB 1157 2021-22
of new fiscal tools for jurisdictions for planning Authorizes counties and cities to establish a real
estate excise tax density incentive zone within
urban growth areas and provides for the
distribution of state real estate excise tax revenues
within such incentive zones.
Adaptive Planning at Regional Scale
Convene collaborative process to HB 1241 2021-22
explore how best to achieve goals of Requires counties, cities, and other local
GMA through development of governments to consult with federally recognized
adaptive management and regionally Tribes during the planning processes under the
based approach that provides Growth Management Act upon receipt of notice
flexibility, coordination, and from the Tribes that they are planning or would like
opportunities to address local and to plan, and requires planning and coordination with
changing conditions. Includes Adaptive and Tribes on certain aspects of a comprehensive plan
consulting with Tribal governments. inclusive planning at
a regional scale
HB 1241 2021-22
Requires counties, cities, and other local
governments to consult with federally recognized
Adaptive Planning at Regional Scale
Tribes during the planning processes under the
Initiate government to government
Growth Management Act upon receipt of notice
consultation with Tribes
from the Tribes that they are planning or would like
to plan, and requires planning and coordination with
Tribes on certain aspects of a comprehensive plan
REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 75
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating WA's
Growth Policy
Roadmap to WA's Future Framework
Recommendations Discussion Topics Successful Legislation Proposed Legislation
HB 1099 - 2021-22
Improving the state's climate response through
updates to the state's comprehensive planning
Resilience to Changing Conditions framework. Requires Commerce to publish
and Disasters SB 5381 - 2021-22 guidelines to reduce GHC emissions
Strategies, policies, implementation Addressing fish passage project permit
plans, and funding for climate streamlining SB 5314 2021-22
adaptation and mitigation at all levels Provides a definition for best available science and
modifies the best available science to be used and
considerations to be made in designating and
Climate change protecting critical areas.
HB 1099 - 2021-22
Improving the state's climate response through
updates to the state's comprehensive planning
Integrate disaster preparedness and
framework. Requires Commerce to publish
emergency and recovery planning
guidelines to reduce GHC emissions.
with growth management planning
and policies
HB 1117 - 2021-22
Promoting salmon recovery through revisions to
the state's comprehensive planning framework.
Statewide Water Planning
Establish collaborative process for
developing statewide water plan
Equity
Integrate equity as a goal in growth HB 1233 2021-22
HB 1335 - 2021-22
planning, policies, strategies, and Adaptive and Concerning limited areas of more intensive rural
Concerning review and property owner
implementation, including adopting it inclusive planning at development. Requires that new planning for an
notification of recorded documents with
as a goal of the GMA and an adaptive a regional scale LAMIRD should rectify systematic equity violations
unlawful racial restrictions
management and regionally based imposed on disadvantaged communities
approach
REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 76
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating WA's
Growth Policy
Roadmap to WA's Future Framework
Recommendations Discussion Topics Successful Legislation Proposed Legislation
SB 5275 2021-22
Economic Development Allows development and redevelopment in terms of
Develop and implement a statewide building size, scale, use, or intensity within a limited
economic development strategy with area of more intensive rural development if all
emphasis on improving rural existing providers of public facilities and services
economies and slow-growing cities confirm that there is sufficient capacity to serve the
new or increased demand from the development
Economic Development
Integrate capital facilities and
economic development planning of
Ports with local and regional capital
facilities, growth management, and
transportation planning
State agency coordination with, and
support for, regional plans - integrate
state agency planning into the GMA
and consider how to improve
coordination in implementation of
regional growth management plans
Funding and capacity for planning
and implementation - increase grants
for cities and counties to plan under
GMA Cycle for updating &
dedicated funding
Funding and capacity for planning
for planning
and implementation - align funding of
county government with realities of
implementing GMA
REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 77
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating WA's
Growth Policy
Roadmap to WA's Future Framework
Recommendations Discussion Topics Successful Legislation Proposed Legislation
Monitoring and evaluation of
comprehensive and regional plans -
HB 1241 -2021-22
fund and develop guidelines and
Implement progress report requirement with
methods for performance monitoring
monitoring
and measurement of comprehensive
and regional plan implementation
Education - Incorporate growth
planning framework, roles of local,
regional, and state govts, and
responsibilities of elected officials as
policymakers into required training
for elected officials
Education - identify opportunities to
strengthen civics education
HB 1099 - 2021-22
Improving the state's climate response through
updates to the state's comprehensive planning
framework.
HB 1117 - 2021-22
Promoting salmon recovery through revisions to
Health of environment - add a
the state's comprehensive planning framework.
planning goal to GMA - resilience to Climate change
SB 5306 2021-22
climate change and natural disasters
Requires the Department of Fish and Wildlife to
adopt conservation and restoration guidelines to
assist counties and cities in the preservation and
enhancement of anadromous fisheries, as part of
designating and protecting critical areas under the
Growth Management Act
REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 78
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating WA's
Growth Policy
Roadmap to WA's Future Framework
Recommendations Discussion Topics Successful Legislation Proposed Legislation
Health of environment - convene
collaborative process with, at
minimum, reps of cities, counties,
Tribes, state agencies, ports,
business, development, planning, and
envir orgs to ID areas of agreement
for reforming SEPA
Human health and wellbeing - add
planning goal to GMA on human
health and wellbeing; elevate and
fund implementation of human health
and wellbeing in growth management
Human health and wellbeing -
Prepare "comprehensive planning
and civic design for public health"
guidebook
HB 1337 - 2021-22
Provide General Fund distribution to incentivize
cities and counties to adopt ADU policies
Housing - develop funding strategies
and new fiscal tools for cities and HB 1923 – 2019-20
HB 1157 2021-22
counties to implement housing Housing Provides cities grants to take actions to
Authorizes counties and cities to establish a real
elements in comp plans and monitor increase housing supply.
estate excise tax density incentive zone within
achievement of housing targets
urban growth areas and provides for the
distribution of state real estate excise tax revenues
within such incentive zones.
REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 79
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating WA's
Growth Policy
Roadmap to WA's Future Framework
Recommendations Discussion Topics Successful Legislation Proposed Legislation
HB 2343 – 2019-20
HB 1232 2021-22
Concerning urban housing supply. Bill
Requires cities and counties planning under the
provides limits on residential parking
Growth Management Act (GMA) to plan for single-
requirements for low-income housing near
family residences such as detached dwellings,
transit and addresses action cities fully
duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes within urban
planning under the GMA are encouraged
growth areas (UGAs) in the housing element of the
to take in order to increase residential
comprehensive plan
Housing - address availability of building capacity.
middle-income housing, low- and
SB 5189 2021-22
middle-income homeownership, and E2SHB 1220 – 2021-22 Comprehensive
Authorizes a person to apply for an American
impacts of short-term rentals and planning, emergency housing/shelters and
Dream Home permit through 2031 to encourage
investment homes on housing transitional and permanent supportive
development of single-family homes for low-
availability and affordability housing, Housing Element, existing and
income households
projected needs inventory and analysis,
providing affordable housing at all low-
SB 5269 2021-22
income levels
Requires all Growth Management Act planning
jurisdictions to allow for multifamily housing units
ESSB 5235 – 2021-22 Increasing housing
in areas zoned for single-family residential use
units inventory by removing arbitrary limits
within urban growth areas (UGAs).
on housing option
Annexation - convene collaborative
process with, at minimum, reps of
cities, counties, special districts,
boundary review boards, planning 2SSB 5368 - 2020-21
and envir. orgs to ID areas of Encouraging rural economic development,
Municipal
agreement for reforming annexation review by Hearings Board, Interlocal
Annexation
laws to streamline process and agreements/annexations/annexation sales
remove barriers while maintaining tax credit
fiscal sustainability of counties,
clarifies roles of special districts, and
reduces conflicts
REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 80
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating WA's
Growth Policy
Roadmap to WA's Future Framework
Recommendations Discussion Topics Successful Legislation Proposed Legislation
Economic viability of ag and other
natural resource industries - support 2SSB 5368 - 2021-22
policies and programs that enhance Encouraging rural economic development,
economic and environmental viability review by Hearings Board, Interlocal
of agriculture and ID and develop agreements/annexations/annexation sales
strategies and programs that address tax credit
needs of farmers
Economic viability of ag and other
natural resource industries - assess
cumulative impacts of laws and
regulations on ability of ag and other
natural resource-based industries to
be economically viable and achieve
desired environmental outcomes
Transportation - clarify how six chief
goals of WA State Transportation
Plan can be achieved in context with
GMA planning goals
Transportation - provide funding for
WSDOT, WSTC, RTPOs, and local
govts to monitor and evaluate their
plans, policies, and systems
SB 5312 - 2021-22
Authorizes the use of appropriations to the Growth
Transportation - consider
Management Planning and Environmental Review
strengthening requirements and
Fund to fund grants to cities to pay for certain
incentivize use of multimodal
planning-related costs related to transit-oriented
performance measures within UGAs
development, including subarea plans and
environmental impact statements.
REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 81
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating WA's
Growth Policy
Roadmap to WA's Future Framework
Recommendations Discussion Topics Successful Legislation Proposed Legislation
Transportation - consider
strengthening and funding local
planning requirements for freight
Transportation - integrate state
highways into the GMA
transportation concurrency system
Coordination with military
installations - coordinate planning
between federal military installations
and regional, county, and city govts
Other - convene multi-sector urban
and rural summits to dialogue and
help ID priorities for modifications to
GMA for rural and urban communities
Other - consider revising update cycle
for comp plans from every 8 years to
every 10 years. Begin in phases, HB 1241 2021-22
Cycle for updating &
starting with moving the next update Increases the review and revision cycle for
dedicated funding
deadline for four central Puget Sound comprehensive plans and Shoreline Master Plans
for planning
counties from 2023 to 2025 in order from eight to ten years.
to sync with population data from
2020 census
Other - convene collaborative
process to ID areas of agreement for SB 5380 - 2021-22
improvements to growth policy Directs the Department of Commerce to work with
Development
framework's development regulations affected stakeholders to evaluate local government
regulations and
and permitting processes to shorten project review and permit timelines and provide
permit processes
time needed to issue permits, recommendations for streamlining the permit
increase predictability, and achieve issuance process by December 1, 2021.
better outcomes
REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 82
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating WA's
Growth Policy
Roadmap to WA's Future Framework
Recommendations Discussion Topics Successful Legislation Proposed Legislation
SB 5042 - 2021-22
Concerning the effective date of certain actions
taken under the growth management act. Creates
Other - convene process to gather
or expands LAMIRDs
additional information and research
to ID areas of agreement for
HB 1233 2021-22
improvement to LAMIRD provisions
Concerning limited areas of more intensive rural
of GMA
development. Requires that new planning for an
LAMIRD should rectify systematic equity violations
imposed on disadvantaged communities
Other - integrate school district
capital facilities planning, including
school siting, with land use and
capital plans of local govts
Other - integrate water and sewer
districts, school districts, and port
district planning into the GMA
Other - initiate review of state
HB 2342 - 2019-20 HB 2342 - 2019-20
statutes, beginning with SMA and Development
aligns timing of comp plan updates aligns timing of comp plan updates required by the
SEPA to ID major conflicts or regulations and
required by the GMA with the timing of GMA with the timing of SMP updates required by
disconnects with goals and permit processes
SMP updates required by the SMA the SMA
requirements of GMA
Figure 6: Growth Policy Framework Recommendations and Opportunities
REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 83
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Land Use Study Commission (1998)
Overview
The Land Use Study Commission was established by the Legislature in 1995 and issued annual
reports and recommendations in 1996 and 1997. The 14-member Commission was
established with the overall mission to integrate the state’s land use and environmental laws
into a single manageable statute. In addition, the Commission was tasked to evaluate several
topics which match closely to findings, concepts and recommendations that would come from
later studies, including:
• The effectiveness of state and local government efforts to consolidate and integrate the
Growth Management Act (GMA), the State Environmental Policy Act, the Shoreline
Management Act, and other land use, planning, environmental, and permitting laws.
• Revisions and modifications needed to State land use, planning, and environmental law
and implementation to adequately plan for growth and achieve economically and
environmentally sustainable development, to adequately assess environmental impacts
of comprehensive plans, development regulations, and growth, and to reduce the time
and cost of obtaining project permits.
• Monitor instances state-wide of the vesting of project permit applications during the
period that an appeal is pending before a growth management hearings board.
• Monitor local government consolidated permit procedures and the effectiveness of the
timelines established by RCW 36.70B.090.
• Evaluate funding mechanisms that will enable local governments to pay for and recover
the costs of conducting integrated planning and environmental analysis.
The Land Use Commission Reports also recommended streamlining the standard of review
process to align with Courts, refining the Growth Management Hearing Board’s processes, and
clarify actions required after determinations. It also recommended local governments be
incentivized to comply with the GMA.
The 1996 report looked at GMA issues grouped into three categories: GMA Requirements,
Review of Local Government Decisions, and Financing. Each issue was accompanied by a set
of recommendations which considered the pros and cons of the proposed options.
The Commission’s 1996 recommendations were introduced as SB 6094 and were left largely
intact in the bill as it was signed by the Governor. The following is a brief summary of
recommendations from the Commission’s 1996 Report that were included as elements of ESB
6094 and those recommendations which were not considered by the Legislature.
The following issues were included in ESB 6094:
GMA Requirements Review of Local Government Decisions
Public participation – requirement for Standard of Review – Changes Hearings
additional notice to the public when Board standards from “preponderance of the
evidence” to “clearly erroneous” – was
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 84
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
amendments to a comprehensive plan will designed to give greater weight to the
affect a property owner decisions of local elected officials.
Monitoring and Review Program – creation Invalidity – Changes in the manner in the
of Review and Evaluation (or Buildable authority of the GMHBs to invalidate part or
Lands) program. all of a comprehensive plan or development
regulation
Rural Lands – Provided flexible standards by Board Procedure and Dispute Resolution
which a county could allow appropriate Options – Allows flexibility in the time for
development in rural areas including issuance of a decision to allow alternative
allowance for Limited Areas of More Intense dispute resolution
Rural Development (LAMIRD)
Agricultural Lands – Use of innovative Incentives for Compliant Local Governments
zoning techniques – Adjustments to annexation laws intended
to provide a consistent process for
annexation, regardless of the legal structure
of a city, and to simplify the process for
annexing territory largely surrounded by a
city.
Figure 7: Issues addressed in ESB 6094 (1996)
Recommendations not addressed by the Legislature included:
1. Infrastructure Finance – recommendation that local governments planning under the
GMA be given the authority to impose a sales tax on new construction to help fund
capital facilities plans adopted under the GMA. Any tax imposed would be a credit
against the state sales tax, resulting in no net tax increase, but only a shift of revenue
from the state to local governments.
2. Integrated Planning and Environmental Review – The 1995 Legislature created the
Planning and Environmental Review Fund to fund efforts to better integrate
environmental review and land use planning. The premise was that if better
environmental review is conducted during planning stages, the need to analyze
environmental impacts during project review will be lessened.
The 1997 report continued the previous year’s efforts. It included substantial information on
several topical areas consistent with issues that will be reviewed as part of the Phase III
project. For several topics, overviews were provided, but no formal recommendation for
legislation was made. The report also outlined pros and cons for several of these topics. Areas
discussed in the 1997 report included:
• Ways to consolidate growth management framework into one manageable statute – no
recommedation provided due to lack of consensus
• Stronger integration of special purpose districts have not been adequately integrated
into the Growth Management Act
• Vesting during a period of non-compliance or invalidity
• Infastructure financing
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 85
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Conclusions and Lessons Learned
The 14-member Land Use Study Commission successfully brought forward recommendations
that were integrated into Washington’s Growth Policy Framework. This includes enhanced
public participation requirements and development of the Review and Evaluation program,
which is used by seven of our fastest growing counties today. It is clear that work conducted in
1996 resulted in numerous recommendations that made it into ESB 6094, which ultimately
became law. Efforts to provide additional recommendations in 1997 became more difficult.
Although several issues were studied and discussed at length, the Commission was unable to
generate specific recommendations for some issues. Many of those issues, including vesting,
paying for infrastructure, and stronger integration of special purpose districts into planning
efforts, are still issues today and were topics brought forward during the Road Map to
Washington’s Future and Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework projects.
Learning from this important project and leveraging the work completed is an important step
as Phase III moves forward. The following are some high-level observations and lessons
learned from the Land Use Study Commission.
Land Use Study Commission Applicability to Phase III - Leveraging
efforts/lessons learned
The Commission consisted of 14 The size of the Commission is consistent with the
members. The smaller size of the group general size anticipated for the Collaborative
allowed them to work through Roadmap Phase III task force. This seemed to
numerous areas of the growth policy work well and allowed the Commission to work
framework. Even where through numerous topical areas associated with
recommendations were not made, the growth policy framework.
substantial information was produced
that could aid this project.
The Commission represented a cross- The cross-section represented on the Commission
section of those interested in land use provides a great foundation for this project.
and environmental issues, including Groups identified as part of this project have been
business, agriculture, labor, involved with recent Roadmap and Framework
environmental and neighborhood projects and will certainly be part of the
activists, local and state governments, engagement process for this project, including
the Tribes, and the general public. direct engagement or representation on the task
force.
Recent efforts, including this project, appear to
provide broader opportunities for engagement.
This includes engagement focused on Tribes and
the lived experiences and perspectives of people
who have too often been excluded from public
policy decision-making and unevenly impacted by
those decisions.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 86
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Commission worked over more The 1996 and 1997 Commission reports provide a
than one legislative session. good guidepost for the amount of work and
approach towards making recommendations that
can be accomplished in each year of a multi-
session project. Given the Phase III task force will
also work over two sessions, the approach
previously utlized can certainly help inform the
process for this project.
The Commission appears to have The approach to making recommendations from
worked off of consensus. This led to the task force to the Legislature will be important.
work on several issues where Even where consensus is not reached, it may still
information was developed, but no be important to forward recommendations, while
recommendation was formally made to providing the perspecitves of task force members
the Legislature. who may not agree with the recommendation.
Figure 8: Land Use Study Commission Lessons Learned
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 87
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Governor’s Land Use Agenda (2006)
Overview
Governor Gregoire’s 2006 Land Use Agenda aimed at identifying known problems and issues
with land use and the growth policy framework and applying legislative actions to address
these issues. The agenda identified the need for best available science informing local
decisions, greater flexibility in GMA timelines for slower-growing communities, consideration
of flexibility in agricultural accessory uses, support for agriculture pilot programs, and
reaffirming eminent domain restrictions.
Proposed legislation in the report Included:
• Clarifying the best available science requirements to protect critical areas. While HB
2815 did not pass, it provided an option where cities and counties could adopt Best
Available Science (BAS) recommendations provided by Commerce instead of having to
develop their own record. If adopted and implemented, GMA appeals would be limited.
• SSB 6427 passed the Legislature and provided a three year extension for slower
growing counties to review and revise (update) policies and development regulations
concerning critical areas and resource lands. The bill also provided new language
allowing comprehensive plans to be updated more than one time per year for planned
action.
• SHB 2917 passed the Legislature and expanded the allowance for nonagricultural
accessory uses to include support of agricultural uses. It also clarified that non-
agricultural uses may be allowed when consistent with the size, scale, and intensity of
the existing agricultural use of the property and the existing buildings on the site.
Conclusions and Lessons Learned
Governor Gregoire’s 2006 Land Use Agenda focused on creation of legislation aimed at
identifying known problems and issues with land use and the growth planning framework and
applying legislative actions to address these issues. The Governor’s Land Use Agenda began
as a set of proposed bills. Outreach included a series meetings and workshops to discuss first
drafts of six proposed bills. Targeted outreach to key stakeholders and implementers of the
Growth Management Act followed the workshops.
For this project, the Governor’s office put forward ideas and for each bill identified:
• The statement of the problem the bill is addressing;
• What the proposed bill would do; and
• Who would benefit
Learning from this project and leveraging the work completed is an important step as Phase III
moves forward. The following are some high-level observations and lessons learned from the
Governor’s Land Use Agenda.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 88
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Governor’s Land Use Agenda Applicability to Phase III - Leveraging
efforts/lessons learned
The Land Use Agenda used a format to bring This format coupled with additional
forward the ideas and initiatives that resulted information such as pros/cons and task
in legislation. This included the problem force recommendations could be a good
statement, what the bill would do, and who it format to use as recommendations are
would benefit. made on specific topics.
The project relied on a core team of agencies Involvement of key state agencies early in
who developed initial legislation and then the process will be an element of the Phase
engaged key stakeholders and implementers III project. However, this project is going to
of the Growth Management Act. focus on strong upfront engagement and
development of recommendations from the
task force, rather than stakeholders
providing comments on legislation that is
already developed.
This approach should provide
broader opportunities for engagement. This
includes engagement focused on Tribes and
the lived experiences and perspectives of
people who have too often been excluded
from public policy decision-making and
unevenly impacted by those decisions.
Figure 9: Governor’s Land Use Agenda Lessons Learned
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 89
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A Road Map to Washington’s Future (2019)
Overview
In 2017, the Washington State Legislature allocated funds to the William D. Ruckelshaus
Center for a two-year project to create a Road Map to Washington’s Future (Road Map).
The purpose of the project was to articulate a vision of Washington’s desired
future and identify additions, revisions, or clarifications to the state’s growth
management and planning framework needed to reach that future. The project
included gathering information and hearing from 2,500 individuals, which included
nearly 400 elected officials. (Road Map to Washington’s Future Final Report)
The Road Map project gleaned information from those who participated about what they feel is
and is not working well within the growth policy framework. Issues were captured by topic. In
addition, Road Map identifies actions that translate into “Transformational and Systemic
Change”, as well as recommendations for key reforms that would improve the existing
framework. The tables below list recommended policy actions by topic. A full cross-tabulation
of specific ideas can be found in Appendix A.
Figure 10, below, contains the recommended actions from the Road Map project related to
transformational and systemic change.
Topic Actions
Funding and Focus legislative efforts on enhanced state funding and new fiscal tools that
Revenue enable cities, counties, regions, and state agencies to address needs and
Generation manage growth.
Adaptive Convene a collaborative process to explore how best to achieve the goals of
Planning at a the GMA through the development of an adaptive management and
Regional regionally-based approach that provides flexibility, coordination, and creates
Scale opportunities to address local and changing conditions and needs. Consult
with Tribal governments, to determine if and how they may want to be
involved in such a process.
Initiate government-to-government consultation with Tribes in Washington
State, to discuss the key questions asked, and guidance detailed, in the
Road Map to Washington’s Future Report.
Resilience to Develop comprehensive and integrated strategies, policies, implementation
Changing plans, and funding for climate adaptation and mitigation on the local,
Conditions regional, and state level.
and
Disasters Integrate disaster preparedness, and emergency and recovery planning, with
growth management planning and policies.
Statewide Establish a collaborative process to develop a statewide water plan for
Water sustainably protecting, managing, and developing water resources in the
Planning state, for current and future generations.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 90
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic Actions
Equity Integrate equity as a goal in growth planning, policies, strategies, and
implementing actions, including adopting it as a goal of the GMA and an
adaptive management regionally-based approach, if developed.
Economic Develop and implement a statewide economic development strategy that
Development builds on the unique assets and needs of the diverse regions of the state.
Place emphasis on improving rural economies and slow-growing cities.
Identify in the strategy what is needed to support local economic
development plans, including state agency programs and state investments.
Integrate the capital facilities and economic development planning of Ports
with local and regional capital facilities, growth management, and
transportation planning.
Figure 10: Road Map Recommended Actions for Transformational and Systemic Change
In addition, the Road Map project identified key reforms that could “Improve the Existing
Growth Planning Framwork”, as shown in Figure 11 below.
Topic Actions
State Agency Integrate State agency planning into the GMA and consider how to
Coordination with, improve coordination in the implementation of regional growth
and Support for, management plans.
Regional Plans
Funding and Increase grants for cities and counties to plan under the GMA. Align
Capacity for funding of county government with the realities of implementing GMA.
Planning and
Implementation
Monitoring and Fund and develop guidelines and methods for performance monitoring
Evaluation of and measurement of comprehensive and regional plan
Comprehensive implementation.
and Regional Plans
Education Incorporate into already existing required training for elected officials
an understanding of policies in the growth planning framework; the
roles of state, regional, and local governments and the responsibilities
of elected officials as policy makers, related to growth management.
Identify opportunities to strengthen civic education throughout the
state and across all sectors, including K-12, as well as community-
based programs.
Health of the Add goal to GMA - Resilience to climate change and natural disasters.
Environment
Convene a collaborative process with, at a minimum, representatives
of cities, counties, Tribes, state agencies, ports, business,
development, planning, and environmental organizations to identify
areas of agreement for reforming the State Environmental Policy Act.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 91
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic Actions
Human Health and Add a Planning Goal to the GMA on Human Health and Well-Being.
Well-Being Elevate and fund the implementation of human health and well-being
as a goal in growth management planning and implementation,
including the design and location of transportation and other
infrastructure, land use plans, and development regulations.
Prepare a “comprehensive planning and civic design for public health”
guidebook to assist state agencies and local governments on ways
they could factor human health and well-being into updating their
comprehensive plans, and the design and implementation of capital
facilities such as state highways, county roads, city streets, and public
parks. This could be a joint effort of the Departments of Commerce
and Health, in consultation with Tribal governments, State agencies,
local governments, public health professionals, and county public
health departments.
Housing Develop funding strategies and new fiscal tools for cities and counties
to implement the housing elements in their Comprehensive Plans and
monitor achievement of housing targets.
Address availability of middle- income housing, low and middle-
income homeownership, and the impacts of short-term rentals and
investment homes on housing availability and affordability.
Annexation Convene a collaborative process with, at a minimum, representatives
of cities, counties, special districts, boundary review board, planning
and environmental organizations to identify areas of agreement for
reforming annexation laws in a way that streamlines the process and
removes barriers to annexation of land adjacent to existing cities,
maintains the fiscal sustainability of counties, clarifies the role of
special districts, and reduces conflicts.
Economic Viability Support policies and programs that enhance the economic and
of Agriculture and environmental viability of agriculture and identify and develop
Other Natural strategies and programs that address the needs of farmers.
Resource
Industries Undertake an assessment of the cumulative impacts of laws and
regulations on the ability of agriculture and other natural resource-
based industries to be economically viable and to achieve desired
environmental outcomes.
Transportation Clarify how the six chief goals of the Washington State Transportation
Plan can be achieved in context with GMA Planning Goals.
Provide funding support for WSDOT, WSTC, RTPOs, and local
governments to monitor and evaluate how well their plans, policies,
and systems are working, in order to enable them to consider
appropriate course corrections.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 92
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic Actions
Consider strengthening the requirements and incentivizing the use of
multimodal performance measures within urban growth areas.
Consider strengthening and funding local planning requirements for
freight.
Integrate state highways into the transportation concurrency system.
Coordination with Coordinate planning between federal military installations and
Military regional, county, and city governments.
Installations
Other GMA Convene multi-sector urban and rural summits to dialogue and help
Modifications identify priorities for modifications of the GMA that would improve
planning and implementation for rural and urban communities.
Consider revising the update cycle for comprehensive plans from
every eight years to every ten years. Begin this process in phases,
starting with moving the next update deadline for the four Central
Puget Sound counties from 2023 to 2025, in order to sync with
population data from the 2020 Census.
Convene a collaborative process to ID areas of agreement for
improvements to the statewide planning framework’s development
regulations and permitting processes to shorten the time needed to
issue permits and increase predictability and achieve better outcomes
for permit applicants and residents in the vicinity of new development.
Gather additional information and research and to identify areas of
agreement for improvements to the GMA provisions for LAMIRDs.
Integrate school district capital facilities planning, including school
siting, with the land use policies and capital plans of local
governments.
Integrate water and sewer districts, school districts, and port district
planning into the GMA.
Initiate a review of State statutes, beginning with the SMA and SEPA,
to identify major conflicts or disconnects with the goals and
requirements of the GMA, and undertake efforts to reduce gaps,
conflicts, or redundancies
Figure 11: Road Map Recommendations for Improving the Existing Planning Framework
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 93
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Conclusions and Lessons Learned
The Road Map to Washington’s Future project identified numerous potential additions,
revisions, and clarifications to the state’s growth policy framework that were considered by the
Legislature. The project identifed reforms that would create “Transformational and Sytstemic
Change” and those that would “Improve the Existing Growth Planning Framework.”
Project recommendations were formulated after two years of engagement throughout
Washington State. Learning from this important project and leveraging the work completed is
an important step as Phase III moves forward. The following are some high-level observations
and lessons learned from the Road Map to Washington’s Future.
Road Map to Washington’s Future Applicability to Phase III - Leveraging
efforts/lessons learned
The Road Map project included a robust The engagement plan prepared for the
engagement process that is documented Phase III project will build upon the
within the project report. This included engagement efforts conducted as part of
workshops throughout the State over a two the Road Map project. The information and
year period and participant surveys on what is perspectives previously gathered and
working well and not working well within the shared will be invaluable to the Phase III
growth policy framework. The report task force as recommendations are made.
documents the participant list and both
workshop summaries and interview questions We will leverage the engagement completed
that were asked. The project gathered previously. It will allow this project to focus
information from 2,500 individuals, including engagement as specified by the Legislature
nearly 400 elected officials. and create recommendations that will be
made by the task force and considered by
the Legislature.
The Road Map project identified a The Road Map project, along with existing
comprehensive set of reforms and actions legislation that has been developed as a
that should be considered. result of the project, will provide a great
foundation from which the task force can
work as they make recommendations.
The work completed will also allow this
project to have already developed ideas to
build on. This will allow the task force the
ability to focus on refining the existing
recommendations and legislation along with
developing new ideas when brought forward
by the task force or through engagement
conducted as part of this project.
Figure 12: Road Map Lessons Learned
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 94
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework (2021)
Overview
Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework (Framework) continued the work of the 2019
Road Map project. The project ran from July 30 - December 15, 2020 (final report published in
January 2021) and engaged stakeholders, State agencies, and seven Tribal governments in
conversations about urgently-needed reforms to Washington’s growth policy framework.
The Framework project grew out of the Road Map project and the fact that the latter did not
include specific statutory language. The Legislature empowered the Department of Commerce
to fund a work group to review and make specific statutory recommendations for updating the
Growth Management Act in time for the 2021 legislative session.
This goal was derailed by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, and the project was scaled back in
resources and timeline. While this Framework project made no specific recommendations for
2021 legislation, the project team at the University of Washington’s Center for Livable
Communities did offer several process recommendations, including continuation of work,
which resulted in the Phase III project.
While broad agreement for specific legislative changes did not result from this project, there
was agreement that urgent issues, such as housing affordability, environmental degradation,
and societal inequity, are likely to become more severe over time and that continued work was
warranted. A more detailed tabulation of project discussion points can be found in Appendix B.
Six specific issues or themes were pulled forward and analyzed as part of this project:
Theme Main Points of Discussion
Consideration of the goals of the GMA and what the Road Map
project team found in conducting engagement statewide
Regional diversity – how to right-size the growth policy framework?
Some discussion of updating statutes like the Shoreline
Adaptive & Management Act and SEPA to have regional variation along the lines
Inclusive Planning of the GMA. It may be appropriate, according to some, to address
at a Regional Scale both climate change and housing issues differently in the ten
“metropolitan counties” than in the rural counties.
Tribal involvement in making regional policy (especially Countywide
Planning Policies) was discussed at great length, including the fact
that each Tribe would have to independently decided if they wanted
to participate in the CPP process.
Cycle for Updating Local government and business associations supported changing
& Dedicated from an 8-year update cycle to a 10-year cycle. However, a minority
Funding for opinion countered that the merits of syncing with the Census
Planning
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 95
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Theme Main Points of Discussion
calendar are overrated and that waiting an additional two years
would delay needed action on urgent issues.
A 10-year cycle with a 5-year check-in was discussed, but some
argued that a 5-year check-in would create more work sooner than
even the 8-year cycle. No agreement was reached on this.
County and city associations objected to the prospect for unfunded
mandates for new or continuing planning requirements.
Missing middle housing was the housing focus of this project. Some
participants saw middle housing as an opportunity to increase supply
and choice within Urban Growth Areas, but other parties were
skeptical of a potential “one size fits all” approach and preferred the
HB 1923-style process.
Housing
There was no strong support for amending the GMA to make
advisory WAC into binding ones.
More data are needed to support nuanced approaches to providing
more diverse housing options.
Desire to decrease uncertainty and delay in permitting.
Proposals included state-mandated minimum residential densities
within urban growth areas, greater reliance on the hearing examiner
Development
system, and increased consequences for local governments that fail
Regulations &
to process permits in a timely fashion.
Permit Processes
Another idea was greater empahsis on updating local regulations to
implement plans than constantly updating plans and policies.
No widespread and/or strong support for any particular idea.
No agreement on recommendations despite interest in the subject.
Acknowledgement that climate change is an issue that transcends
several other seemingly separate issues, making it hard to make
recommendations on climate that stand alone from land use,
Climate Change housing, transportation, and capital facilities, to name a few issues.
When it became clear that a detailed climate change bill would be
introduced in the 2021 session, the group determined that their time
would be better spent on the issue when that bill was introduced than
during these discussions.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 96
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Theme Main Points of Discussion
Although the issue was of great interest to several parties, they
determined they would not have time during the truncated process to
Municipal fully discuss and dissect the issue of annexations.
Annexation
In addition to county, city, and water and sewer districts
associations, other units of government, including schools and fire
service providers, should also be involved in future discussions.
Figure 13: Key Discussions from Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework
The project did make four process recommendations:
First, consideration of changes to the Growth Policy Framework, and the regional
and local plans and actions that are guided by it, is required. Such effort must be
more inclusive and representative than what has been done to date. In addition to
the stakeholder groups and Tribal governments who have taken part in this project,
the Legislature must also assure the meaningful engagement of the voices,
perspectives, and lived experiences of under-represented and unevenly burdened
communities and people.
Second, the design of future phases of any collaborative work group process must
be informed by the work that has gone before, but must also address the gaps and
deficiencies of those earlier phases. For example, an agreed upon base of facts
will be essential to the evaluation of alternatives, so adequate fnancial and
institutional provision should be made to enable targeted research, data collection,
objective and rigorous analysis.
Third, to implement the frst two recommendations will require that adequate time
be taken and sufficient resources be allocated by the State. A financial
commitment at least on the scale of the 2020 Legislative budget proviso needs to
be allocated in the 2021-2023 biennium to support this work. It would be
appropriate to direct the funding to the Department of Commerce to work with
other state agencies and retain the needed subject matter and process expertise
to design and successfully facilitate the project. The objective should be to identify
broadly supported reforms to the State’s Growth Policy Framework for action in
the 2022 and 2023 legislative sessions.
Fourth, a key role must be played by the state’s elected leadership. This could take
a number of forms. The options include a task force with four-corners legislative
representation and/or a blue-ribbon commission with subject matter experts as
well as the chairs and ranking members of appropriate Senate and House
Committees. The Governor’s office could be directly represented and/or rely on the
directors or their designees from state agencies including the departments of
Commerce, Ecology, Transportation, Health, and Fish and Wildlife. Also invited to
participate should be representatives of the Department of Natural Resources and
any interested Tribal governments. (Source: Updating Washington’s Growth Policy
Framework Final Report, page 36.)
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 97
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Conclusions and Lessons Learned
Learning from this project and leveraging the work completed is an important step as Phase III
moves forward. The following are some high-level observations and lessons learned from
Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework.
Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Applicability to Phase III - Leveraging
Framework efforts/lessons learned
The Framework project further refined the Both of the recent projects provide a solid
broad set of issues pulled forward by the foundation from which to build. The
Roadmap to Washington’s Future project. The recommendations within this report will be
six key themes include: leveraged by the task force as
• Adaptive & Inclusive Planning at a recommendations are provided to the
Regional Scale Legislature.
• Cycle for Updating & Dedicated Funding
for Planning
• Housing
• Development Regulations & Permit
Processes
• Climate Change
• Municipal Annexation
The project’s process recommendations Collaborative Roadmap Phase III is a direct
focused on the need to continue the work and outgrowth of the process recommendations
how that work should be done as inclusively of this report.
as possible. Specific recommendations
included focusing on the voices of people
who are under-represented and unevenly
impacted by growth policy decisions as well
as an analysis of gaps in prior work.
The project took place over a five month time The depth of engagement and processes for
period, and engagement was severely both of the recent projects has been
restricted by COVID-19. This resulted in leveraged as an engagement plan has been
project meetings with heavy participation (up developed.
to 100 participants). While this format
provided a great arena to explore topics Past projects provide an enormous head
resulting from the Road Map to Washinton’s start as we engage with Tribes, the task
Future project, time for dialogue with those force, interested groups, and the
who wished to participate was limited. Legislature. We have been able to study
what has worked well and what is necessary
in order to assist in meeting the desired
goals of the Legislature as articulated in the
budget proviso.
Figure 14: Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework Lessons Learned
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 98
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Leveraging Legislative Efforts to Implement Recommendations
The Washington State Legislature’s website provides an abundance of information on bills.
This includes those that have passed the Legislature and those that have been introduced but
did not pass. The website provides a topical index of issues sorted by subject. This includes
topics associated with the primary statutes being considered under the Phase III project.
Successful Legislation – 2020 and 2021 Legislative Sessions
Figure 15, below, provides links to those topic pages on the Legislature’s website and relevant
bills that passed in 2020 and 2021, how they relate to recommendations from the Road Map
and Framework projects, and how they relate to the primary statutes being considered as part
of Phase III.
Bills by Topical 2020 successful legislation 2021 successful legislation
category
Growth • HB 2342 - Aligning the timing • E2SHB 1220 – Comprehensive
Management of comprehensive plan planning, emergency
Act updates required by the housing/shelters and
growth management act with transitional and permanent
the timing of shoreline master supportive housing, Housing
program updates required by Element, existing and projected
the shoreline management needs inventory and analysis,
act. providing affordable housing at
• HB 2343 – Concerning urban all low-income levels
housing supply. Bill provides • ESSB 5235 - Increasing housing
limits on residential parking units inventory by removing
requirements for low-income arbitrary limits on housing
housng near transit and option
addresses action cities fully • 2SSB 5368 - Encouraging rural
planning under the economic development, review
GMA are encouraged to take by Hearings Board, Interlocal
in order to increase residential agreements/annexations/annex
building capacity. ation sales tax credit
• HB 1923 – Provides cities • ESSB 5118 - Juvenile offender
grants to take actions to community group care facilities
increase housing supply. as essential public facilities
• HB 2673 - Infill development • HB 1335 - Concerning review
is eligible for a city- or county- and property owner notification
adopted categorical of recorded documents with
exemption from the State unlawful racial restrictions
Environmental Policy Act if
the government action relates
to development that occurs
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 99
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Bills by Topical 2020 successful legislation 2021 successful legislation
category
where current density and
intensity of use is roughly
equal to what is called for in a
planning jurisdiction's
comprehensive plan.
Land Use • SB 5225 - Concerning direct
Planning and appeals to the court of
Development appeals of cases brought
under the administrative
procedure act and the land
use petition act
Shorelines and • SB 5381 - Addressing fish
Shoreline passage project permit
Management streamlining
Figure 15: Successful legislation during 2020 and 2021 sessions
Pending Legislation – 2021 Legislative Session
Legislation that did not pass during the 2021 session provides a solid foundation on which
recommendations for the 2022 session can be built. While it is expected that members of the
Legislature and task force will have additional recommendations beyond the draft legislation
as currently proposed and may have recommendations for changes to existing bills, leveraging
this past work will be important. Building on this existing proposed legislation, as outlined in
Figure 16, is also important because of the short timeframe in which to engage the task force
and complete project deliverables prior to the 2022 session.
Bills from 2020 session which Engage task force and Legislature
Use bills that did not pass in 2020 as
implement past project during fall 2021 to faciliate
a foundation for engagement with
recommendations/propose changes recommendations for the 2022
the task force and Legislature
to our growth policy framework session (Deliverables 3 and 4)
Figure 16: Relationship between past bills and 2022 legislative session.
Figure 17, next page, provides a comprehensive overview of bills from the 2021 legislative
session that may be considered by the task force leading up to the 2022 legislative session.
The table focuses on bills related to recommendations from the Road Map and Framework
projects and the primary statutes related to the growth policy framework that is the subject of
Phase III. The Bills included are those which at least received a hearing during the last session.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 100
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Subject Bill Number Bill Summary Bill Report
Growth Management
Agricultural, forest, or SB 5042 The effective date of an action that expands a UGA; removes the designation of SB 5042
mineral resource lands. agricultural, forest, or mineral resource lands; creates or expands a LAMIRD; Report
Concerning the effective establishes a new fully contained community; or creates or expands an MPR is the
date of certain actions later of the following dates: 60 days after the date of publication of notice of
taken under the growth adoption of the comprehensive plan, development regulation, or amendment to the
management act plan or regulation, implementing the action; or if a petition for review to the Growth
Management Hearings Board is timely filed, upon issuance of the board's final order.
Comprehensive planning, HB 1099 Adds a goal of climate change mitigation to the listed goals of the Growth HB 1099 (Bill
climate change Management Act (GMA). Adds a climate change and resiliency element to the list of report for
elements that must be included within the comprehensive plans certain counties and E2SHB 1099)
cities must adopt under the GMA. Requires the Department of Commerce
(Commerce), in consultation with other state agencies, to publish guidelines that
specify a set of actions counties and cities have available to take related to
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions and vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
reductions. Requires the climate change and resiliency element of the
comprehensive plan of certain counties and cities to identify actions the jurisdiction
will take, consistent with guidelines adopted by Commerce, to reduce GHG emissions
and VMT. Requires the climate change and resiliency element of the comprehensive
plan of certain counties and cities to address the adverse impacts of climate change
on people, property, and ecological systems. Specifies the process by which the
GHG emissions reduction subelement of the climate change and resiliency element
takes effect. Requires Commerce to adopt guidance that creates a model climate
change and resiliency element. Requires the Department of Ecology to update its
Shoreline Master Program guidelines to require Shoreline Master Programs to
address the impact of sea level rise and increased storm severity. Adds
consideration of climate change impacts to the list of elements that must be
contained in optional comprehensive flood control management plans
Comprehensive planning, HB 1117 Adds salmon recovery as a goal under the Growth Management Act (GMA). Requires HB 1117 (Bill
compensatory mitigation, the land use element of comprehensive plans adopted under the GMA to include a report for
strategy that achieves net ecological gain of salmon habitat. Requires the capital E2SHB 1117)
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 101
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Subject Bill Number Bill Summary Bill Report
mitigation hierarchy, and facilities element and transportation element of comprehensive plans adopted under
net ecological gain the GMA to include a schedule for elimination of all identified fish passage barriers.
Requires the Department of Fish and Wildlife to adopt rules that establish criteria for
net ecological gain which certain counties and cities must meet through adoption of
comprehensive plans.
Salmon/anadromous fish, SB 5306 Requires the Department of Fish and Wildlife to adopt conservation and SB 5306
preservation/enhancement restoration guidelines to assist counties and cities in the preservation and report
in critical areas under enhancement of anadromous fisheries, as part of designating and
GMA protecting critical areas under the Growth Management Act.
Requires counties and cities to review and update critical areas policies
and development regulations to implement the guidelines.
Comprehensive planning, HB 1241 Increases the review and revision cycle for comprehensive plans and Shoreline HB 1241 (Bill
county/regional, Indian Master Plans from eight to ten years. Requires certain counties and cities to submit report for
Tribe an implementation progress report with certain required information to the ESHB 1241)
participation/coordination Department of Commerce (Commerce) five years after reviewing and revising a
agreements and comprehensive plan. Requires counties, cities, and other local governments to
consultations: consult with federally recognized Tribes during the planning processes under the
Growth Management Act upon receipt of notice from the Tribes that they are
Comprehensive plans and planning or would like to plan, and requires planning and coordination with Tribes on
shoreline master certain aspects of a comprehensive plan. Requires Commerce to provide services to
programs, review/revision facilitate the timely resolution of disputes between a federally recognized Indian
schedules coordination Tribe and a city or county.
Comprehensive plans,
implementation work
programs and progress
reports
Comprehensive planning, HB 1232 Requires cities and counties planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA) to HB 1232 (Bill
housing plan for single-family residences such as detached dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, report for
and townhomes within urban growth areas (UGAs) in the housing element of the ESSB 1232)
comprehensive plan. Requires cities and counties that do not plan for each specified
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 102
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Subject Bill Number Bill Summary Bill Report
housing type, including single-family residences such as detached dwellings,
duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes within the UGA, to provide how the county and
the cities within the county will meet existing and projected housing needs. Exempts
counties and cities not subject to the buildable lands program from certain GMA
requirements related to planning and consideration of duplexes, triplexes, and
townhomes within the UGA if the county or city adopts certain findings related to lack
of infrastructure support. Requires countywide planning policies to be updated
before the deadline to update a comprehensive plan
Comprehensive planning, SB 5189 Authorizes a person to apply for an American Dream home permit through December SB 5189
housing 31, 2031 to encourage development of single family homes for low-income report
households. Limits permit fees to $1,250 and exempts impact fees on the
development of American Dream Homes. Distributes the state portion of certain
sales and use taxes from the construction of American Dream Homes to counties
and cities. Provides builders of an American Dream Home a 4 percent business and
occupation tax credit on the sale price of the home.
Comprehensive planning, SB 5269 Requires all Growth Management Act planning jurisdictions to allow for multifamily SB 5269
housing housing units in areas zoned for single-family residential use within urban growth report
areas (UGAs). Requires certain parking units per lot size or dwelling unit within a
UGA. Includes the general value increase of property conversions to multifamily
housing units in the calculation of the property tax revenue limit.
Incentives for ADU’s in HB 1337 Provides that cities and counties that adopt specified policies regarding accessory HB 1337
Urban Growth Areas dwelling units may qualify for a distribution from the accessory dwelling unit report
incentive account. Distributions from the accessory dwelling unit incentive account
are based on the number of qualifying new accessory dwelling units constructed
after the regulations are adopted. Provides for the transfer from the General Fund of
$1,000,000 each fiscal year to be used for distributions, with any remainder to be
returned to the General Fund at the end of the fiscal year.
ADU’s outside of Urban HB 1298 Excludes accessory dwelling units located outside urban growth areas HB 1298
Growth Areas from the calculation of housing density in that area if certain local report
development regulations regarding accessory dwelling units are imposed.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 103
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Subject Bill Number Bill Summary Bill Report
Increasing housing supply HB 1157 Authorizes counties and cities to establish a real estate excise tax density incentive HB 1157 (Bill
through the growth zone within urban growth areas and provides for the report for
management act and distribution of state real estate excise tax revenues within such incentive 2SHB 1157)
housing density tax zones.
incentives for local
governments
Facilitating transit- SB 5312 Authorizes the use of appropriations to the Growth Management Planning and SB 5312 (Bill
oriented development and Environmental Review Fund to fund grants to cities to pay for certain planning- report for HB
increasing housing related costs related to transit-oriented development, including subarea plans and 5312)
inventory environmental impact statements. Requires the Department of Commerce to
prioritize applications for grants to facilitate transit-oriented development to
maximize certain specified objectives in the area covered by the grant proposal.
Changes the date, from April 1, 2021, to April 1, 2025, by which cities must take
certain actions related to increasing housing supply in order to be eligible to apply to
the Department of Commerce for planning grants from the Growth Management
Planning and Environmental Review Fund
Concerning the approval of SB 5380 Directs the Department of Commerce to work with affected stakeholders SB 5380
building permits to evaluate local government project review and permit timelines and report
provide recommendations for streamlining the permit issuance process
by December 1, 2021.
Fish and wildlife habitat SB 5314 Provides a definition for best available science and modifies the best available SB 5314
conservation areas, science to be used and considerations to be made in designating and protecting report
designating, using best critical areas. Allows planning jurisdictions to develop a written record to
available demonstrate that the best available science has been included and allows planning
jurisdictions to retain an expert witness in reviews before the Growth Management
Hearings Board (GMHB). Adds a new method to establish GMHB standing for a
person who (1) owns property within the boundaries of the relevant Growth
Management Act (GMA) planning jurisdiction, (2) is or is likely to be prejudiced by the
contested action, and (3) will suffer actual injury if the action is upheld.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 104
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Subject Bill Number Bill Summary Bill Report
Rural development, limited HB 1233 Allows a county to provide for limited areas of more intensive rural development HB 1233
areas of more intensive (LAMIRDs) and to determine what development and redevelopment is consistent Report
development with the character of the existing area through local development regulations.
Allows a county to delineate the logical outer boundary of a more intensive area of
rural development based on various factors, and requires consideration of the needs
of the rural community and the distance to the nearest urban growth area where
services can be contained when setting the boundary. Allows a local government to
connect two separate LAMIRDs and to expand the logical outer boundary for the
LAMIRDs established prior to July 1, 2021, in order to serve the needs of the rural
population. Requires that new planning for an LAMIRD should rectify systematic
equity violations imposed on disadvantaged communities and should provide
incentives for the redevelopment and revitalization of existing buildings and
infrastructure that have fallen into disuse.
Rural development, limited SB 5275 Allows development and redevelopment in terms of building size, scale, use, or SB 5275 (Bill
areas of more intensive intensity within a limited area of more intensive rural development if all existing report for
development providers of public facilities and services confirm that there is sufficient capacity to ESSB 5275)
serve the new or increased demand from the development. Requires commercial
development or redevelopment within a mixed-use area of a limited area of more
intensive rural development to be primarily designed to serve the needs of the rural
population, and sets limits on the size of retail or food service spaces within such
development.
Land Use Planning and
Development – several
bills under this topic
heading were also under
the GMA heading above.
Where they are listed in
both topic headers, they
are not repeated
Building permits SB 5243 Provides that any building permit applications submitted with plans or specifications SB 5243
applications submitted signed by a professional engineer or architect must be deemed complete by the city report
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 105
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Subject Bill Number Bill Summary Bill Report
with engineered plans or county building department with authority. Allows the building department to
deemed complete review the application for general compliance with the zoning or other land use
control ordinances in effect, but it may not impose substantial modifications or
conditions on such submittals.
Environment - several bills
under this topic heading
were also under the GMA
heading above. Where they
are listed in both topic
headers, they are not
repeated
SEPA, exemptions, SB 5428 Exempts permit actions to site a temporary shelter or transitional SB 5428
temporary shelters or encampment for people experiencing homelessness from State report
transitional encampments Environmental Policy Act requirements.
for homeless
Shorelines and Shoreline
Management – all bills
under this topic heading
were also under the GMA
heading above.
Subdivisions - all bills
under this topic heading
were also under the GMA
heading above.
Figure 17: Overview of Relevant Legislation from 2021 Legislative Session
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 106
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix A –A Road Map to Washington’s Future
Recommendations
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 107
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A Road Map to Washington’s Future - Recommendations and Analysis
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
One size does not fit all -
Tailor any future reforms to the GMA or other parts of the
"One Size Fits needs of urban and rural WAC 365-196-
planning framework to fit the respective needs of the urban and
All" different. GMA benefits 426
rural regions and/or let rural counties opt out entirely.
urban and hurts rural.
One size does not fit all - "GMA 2.0 aka GMA Light" - less frequent plan update cycles,
"One Size Fits needs of urban and rural WAC 365-196- allowances for new uses in rural areas, greater flexibility in
All" different. GMA benefits 426 LAMIRD boundaries/uses, partnerships between Tribes and
urban and hurts rural. small towns for economic development flexibility
One size does not fit all - Have the state's role be more proactive like it is with the
Local plans have to align Shoreline Management Act, where the state administers GMA,
"One Size Fits with state policies but states WAC 365-196- provides grants and technical assistance, adopts binding
All" aren't involved in the Growth 426 administrative rules, and final approval authority. Additionally,
Management Hearing Board the state bears the cost of defending the plan if it is appealed
(GMHB) to the GMHB (“safe harbor”).
Tax Structure &
Inadequate tax structure to Transformational reform to the state tax structure and greater
Revenue
fund the GMA revenue-generating options for local municipalities
Generation
Tax Structure & Evaluate tools and approaches used in other states, like
Too few primary revenue
Revenue regional tax base sharing, tax increment financing, value-added,
streams
Generation personal/corporate income taxes.
Tax Structure &
Too few primary revenue
Revenue Enable Tax Increment Financing (TIF).
streams
Generation
Tax Structure &
Too few primary revenue Change bond thresholds for school district, capital facilities,
Revenue
streams and other bonds - make all 50%.
Generation
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 108
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
Lack the fiscal and staff Fund the work to update code standards and design guidelines
Tax Structure &
capacity to meet demands - more technical assistance & grants. Deliver on "Phase 2" to
Revenue
of compounding, complex align local government funding with the cost of planning &
Generation
regulatory requirements implementation.
state agency plans and GMA, SEPA,
Alignment &
actions are not consistent Planning & Overall state-led strategy is needed to focus on aligning state
Coordination of
with local comprehensive Enabling Act, laws and support coordination across state agencies. Identify &
State Laws with
plans and countywide Forest reconcile gaps, ambiguities, & conflicts.
Planning
planning policies Practices Act
Alignment & misalignment between GMA
Coordination of and annexation statutes RCW 35.13, Annexation processes need to be streamlined. Priorities in
State Laws with leading to financial & RCW 36.70A statutes need to be clarified and better aligned.
Planning political barriers
SEPA & GMA are misaligned,
Alignment &
SEPA being misused at a
Coordination of
project permit scale which Change the threshold for exemption from SEPA review.
State Laws with
conflicts with zoning and
Planning
local comp plans
lack of affordable housing
Create better data and analysis of housing collected statewide
Housing and homeownership - being
to provide to local governments.
priced out of neighborhoods
lack of affordable housing
Housing and homeownership - being Treat affordable housing as public infrastructure.
priced out of neighborhoods
lack of affordable housing
Housing and homeownership - being Mandate minimum urban densities.
priced out of neighborhoods
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 109
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
lack of affordable housing
Remove regulatory barriers and incentivize Accessory Dwelling
Housing and homeownership - being
Unit (ADU), cottage, container, and modular home construction.
priced out of neighborhoods
lack of affordable housing
Incentivize cities and counties to allow for more density near
Housing and homeownership - being
transit and commercial districts.
priced out of neighborhoods
Housing & Transportation
disconnected - long
Additional and better fiscal tools are needed to help address
Housing commutes due to
the unmet needs for affordable housing.
unaffordable housing where
people work
short-term rentals or second
Evaluate excess public land that could be used to build
Housing vacation homes/Airbnb hurt
workforce housing.
housing stock
rising housing costs,
treatment of housing as a Amend the housing goal of the GMA to replace "encourage"
Housing commodity, loss of low-cost with "require" with respect to providing housing needs for all
housing contributes to populations.
homelessness crisis
lack of middle-income
Through GMA, require housing targets in countywide planning
housing increasing
policies and comprehensive plans be implemented by
Housing competition for affordable
reasonable measures to increase supply of housing variety of
units and displacing lower
residential densities and housing types.
income households
housing growth planning
WAC 365-196- Implement housing requirements under GMA at a regional
Housing framework is limited to
410 scale.
county borders
permit counters
Housing Provide funding for permit staff to local governments.
understaffed - contribute to
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 110
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
delay and cost of permit
process
In UGAs, prohibit exclusionary housing practices like large lot
poorly written land use WAC 365-196-
Housing zoning, deliberately under-sized utilities, onerous permit
regulations 410
processes, and rolling back-to-back building moratoria.
multi-family housing -
shortage of units and no
improve Multi-Family Property Tax Exemption Program by
enforcement of countywide
Housing extending the duration of the program, decreasing the
planning policies related to
population threshold, and extending past 12-year duration.
MF development
codes/service standards
multi-family housing -
shortage of units and no Discussion and analysis are needed to better understand the
enforcement of countywide issues surrounding condominium building throughout the state
Housing
planning policies related to and to identify ideas and creative solutions to better encourage
MF development condominium building.
codes/service standards
community resistance to Require local governments to remove regulatory barriers to new
Housing
residential infill housing projects, particularly residential infill in UGAs.
Enable environmental and community character to be
maintained through appropriate development and design
community resistance to
Housing standards, urban forestry stewardship plans, concerted efforts
residential infill
to protect critical areas and shorelines, and infrastructure
improvements.
lack of state resources to
Economic attract private investments More Ports protection - protect from incompatible adjacent
Development and grow opportunities for land uses. Prioritize freight mobility.
econ. Development
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 111
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
challenge of agriculture Investments in the rural road and short line rail networks vital to
Economic economies transitioning to freight connections, and state technical assistance and
Development more automation and less economic development programs to grow jobs in small towns
small farms and communities.
communities struggling to
create living-wage jobs,
Economic State investment and regulatory reforms for bringing
attract health care providers
Development broadband access to rural areas.
and educations, and retain
young people
Economic too much growth Statewide economic strategy to redistribute growth - capital
Development concentrated in Seattle investment, agency programs, tax policy, and other incentives.
City, County, & no guidance or foundation
Develop policy for early Tribal participation in decision-making
State how to involve Tribes in
& ensure decisions affecting Tribal reserved rights require free,
Coordination countywide planning
prior, and informed consent.
w/Tribal Govts process
lack of climate change and
Update growth planning framework to address mitigating or
climate impacts in current
Climate Change adapting to impacts of a changing climate.
growth planning framework -
& Natural
no integration with
Disasters Require govt entities such as WSDOT, RTPOs, counties, cities,
hazard/emergency
to establish climate strategies and goals.
management planning
State's adopted schedule
Climate Change and targets to reduce
& Natural greenhouse gas emissions Add 15th planning goal to the GMA to address climate change.
Disasters are not integrated with
growth planning framework
Climate Change State's adopted schedule
& Natural and targets to reduce Add "resilience" as a comp plan element.
Disasters greenhouse gas emissions
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 112
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
are not integrated with
growth planning framework
Annexation Incentives for cities to annex areas that are best served by city
cost and revenue generation
Laws & infrastructure, while also providing counties with the funds to
challenging
Practices promote annexation of unincorporated urban areas.
Renew the annexation sales and use tax.
annexing only greatest
Annexation revenue areas leaves gap for
Better collaboration between cities and counties needed and
Laws & county of residential and
cost sharing agreements.
Practices burden of cost for
infrastructure
Eliminate 1% cap on property taxes.
A review is needed to identify and address barriers preventing
petition method for bringing
Annexation annexation.
part of a UGA into city limits
Laws &
can create arbitrary
Practices Boundary Review Board should have no jurisdiction when
annexation boundaries
shared tax revenue agreement exist.
When annexation includes areas served by special districts -
the special district and city enter into an interlocal agreement -
Annexation lack of clarity when it comes
maybe include county too.
Laws & to GMA, annexation laws,
Practices and special purpose districts
Sync UGA and annexation laws so if a UGA is expanded, the
affected land would automatically be annexed.
low viability of agriculture -
Economically Greater flexibility, more voluntary and incentive driven options
hard for small and mid-sized
Viable Natural based on outcomes, as opposed to regulations focused on
farms to maintain an
Resource compliance - more programs like Voluntary Stewardship
economically viable farm
Industries Program.
business
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 113
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
Economically
Viable Natural compounding of regulations Allow ancillary uses to be co-located on agricultural lands, i.e.,
Resource is burdensome fruit stands, agricultural tourism.
Industries
Economically
Viable Natural compounding of regulations
Ease regulatory processes and less difficult permitting
Resource is burdensome
Industries
Economically Greater efforts being made by counties to appropriately
Viable Natural loss of forest lands and designate agricultural lands of long-term commercial
Resource farms to development significance or statewide regulatory system to ensure long-
Industries term economic viability of natural resource industries.
Economically
climate change negatively
Viable Natural More water storage needed.
impacting natural resource
Resource
industries
Industries
Economically
climate change negatively
Viable Natural The State should prioritize and fund improvements to restore
impacting natural resource
Resource fish habitat and healthy streams.
industries
Industries
Transportation
inconsistent multimodal Improve funding mechanisms for increased mobility and
& Other
data collection transportation choices.
Infrastructure
Transportation little to no coordination
RTPOs and WSDOT should use multimodal performance
& Other between state, regional, and
measures for state highways and ferry routes.
Infrastructure local transportation projects
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 114
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
Transportation little to no coordination Local governments, RTPOs, and WSDOT develop regionally
& Other between state, regional, and consistence performance measures, monitor & evaluate data,
Infrastructure local transportation projects and be provided funding to do so.
missing link between
Transportation
transportation and land use State should allow, encourage, and assist with the design of
& Other
decision in state level complete streets for state highways serving as main streets.
Infrastructure
planning
missing link between
Transportation
transportation and land use Statewide transportation strategy to connect climate change
& Other
decision in state level adaptation, economic, environmental, and human health.
Infrastructure
planning
no clear framework for
coordination and
Transportation
consistency between the Integrate six chief goals of the Washington Transportation Plan
& Other
state, RTPOs, & transit in the GMA planning goals
Infrastructure
service providers in regional
planning
state transportation
Transportation facilities exempt from GMA
Develop mechanisms like concurrency for the state so facilities
& Other growth concurrency while
are provided concurrent with development
Infrastructure local and county agencies
are not
mitigation fee/impact fee
Transportation
collection is not enough to Allow WSDOT to collect impact fees for highway improvements
& Other
cover impact costs and can't from a developer directly.
Infrastructure
be pooled overtime
Transportation no clear framework for
& Other coordination and More funding for RTPOs.
Infrastructure consistency between the
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 115
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
state, RTPOs, & transit
service providers in regional
planning
no statutory requirement to
Transportation include Tribal governments
& Other in transportation planning Adopt State policy including Tribal governments in RTPOs.
Infrastructure and have RTPO
representation
Transportation
gap between freight needs
& Other Adopt policies for adequate freight truck parking supply.
and resources
Infrastructure
Transportation Provide resources to local governments to include State's
gap between freight needs
& Other freight planning recommendations in their local comprehensive
and resources
Infrastructure plans
Transportation broadband access in rural
State supported resources to improve cell service and develop
& Other areas and coastal
broadband infrastructure.
Infrastructure communities is insufficient
Ecosystem natural ecosystems are in Adopt rigorous and uniform critical area regulation to serve
Protection decline State's interest.
Ecosystem recovery of Puget Sound Adopt rigorous and uniform critical area regulation to serve
Protection health failing State's interest.
critical area protection
Ecosystem efforts are fragmented, Adopt rigorous and uniform critical area regulation to serve
Protection uncoordinated, and State's interest.
inconsistent
enviro protection efforts can
Ecosystem
disturb Tribal cultural sites Ecosystem protection should be based on net gain principle.
Protection
and resources
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 116
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
uneven distribution of
resources, technical
Ecosystem
assistance, and projects Monitoring and evaluation must show policies are effective.
Protection
cross the state - too much
focus on Puget Sound area
appeal process to expensive
Enforcement &
and cumbersome - GMHB
Dispute Appeals should go directly to Superior Court - skip the GMHB.
does not follow Superior
Resolution
Court rules
Enforcement & State should review GMA plans and regulations - similar to how
filing petitions for appeals
Dispute Ecology reviews SMPs where residents can provide comments
burdensome
Resolution during the review process.
appeal process to expensive
Enforcement & Commerce should develop "safe harbor" model ordinances for
and cumbersome - GMHB
Dispute local governments to optionally adopt and not subject to
does not follow Superior
Resolution appeals.
Court rules
Equitable
gap between growth
Growth Develop equitable growth planning strategies through new
management policy and
Planning & policies and measures.
social/racial disparities
Implementation
Equitable
gap between growth Growth planning framework should include goals that ensure
Growth
management policy and people/communities/local businesses stay in their
Planning &
social/racial disparities neighborhoods.
Implementation
Equitable
gap between growth
Growth Better partnerships needed between government and private
management policy and
Planning & sector.
social/racial disparities
Implementation
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 117
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
water element missing from
Strategic Water
growth management Statewide water strategy and regional watershed plans.
Planning
framework
"Hirst" law created
Strategic Water
uncertainty about Tribal Establish the amount of senior water rights clearly.
Planning
senior water rights
growth management
framework addresses issues
Regional Provide state funding to support RTPOs as transportation and
on a jurisdiction-by-
Planning beyond regional agencies.
jurisdiction basis rather than
cross-jurisdictions
RTPOs have potential to be
Regional Provide state funding to support RTPOs as transportation and
solution but lack funding
Planning beyond regional agencies.
and statutory authority
counties rarely include
Regional Tribal governments in Adopt policies to encourage Tribal participation in
Planning countywide planning regional/countywide planning.
policies
no requirement or guidance
about what or how to
Monitoring & measure the performance of
install model performance measurement system.
Evaluation a comp plan in
implementing goals and
policies
SEPA process and checklist
SEPA Consider raising exemption threshold or reform SEPA
outdated
excluding special purpose
Coordination
districts from GMA creates
with Special
confusion and competition
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 118
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
Purpose
Districts
Coordination Statutes governing water & sewer districts make clear their
disconnect between land
with Special long-range capital facilities plans must be consistent with the
use planning and
Purpose population projections and designed to serve land use policies
infrastructure funding
Districts of the cities/counties where they are located.
Coordination
with Special
Utility service on a regional scale rather than individual city.
Purpose
Districts
inconsistent statutes - GMA
Coordination
requires 20 years of
with Special
projected growth while utility Align the statutes to have same time horizons.
Purpose
district statutes go beyond
Districts
20 years
Coordination
with Special Ports are not included
Integrate ports into GMA planning as an element.
Purpose meaningfully
Districts
Coordination
Port activities are larger in
with Special
scale and intensity differs Authorize Ports to adopt their own land use and building codes.
Purpose
from other parts of cities
Districts
City, County,
no official mandate for
and State Amend the GMA to give notice to military when land use
coordinating local govts and
Coordination changes or projects are proposed adjacent to military
military installation planning
w/Military airfields/installations.
efforts
Installations
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 119
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
City, County,
no official mandate for
and State
coordinating local govts and Commerce funds to provide a liaison between local
Coordination
military installation planning governments, State elected officials, and military leadership.
w/Military
efforts
Installations
growth planning framework
Leadership, is too complicated for
Engagement, & engagement - disconnect Include civics in K-12 curriculum.
Accountability between planning and
personal interests
growth planning framework
Leadership, is too complicated for
Train State and local govt elected officials on GMA - and
Engagement, & engagement - disconnect
continuously.
Accountability between planning and
personal interests
Leadership,
lack of accountability - no State enforcement of GMA and assist in the implementation of
Engagement, &
requirement to implement plans.
Accountability
Leadership,
lack of accountability - no
Engagement, & Funding for additional planning capacity.
requirement to implement
Accountability
Development
Regulations & permit process time is too Standard for appeals needs to be higher to discourage frivolous
Permit long appeals.
Processes
Development
More permits of "right" rather than quasi-judicial - no public
Regulations & permit process time is too
hearing if application complies with all local and state
Permit long
requirements.
Processes
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 120
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
Density & growth planning framework
Community does not take into account Streamline design-based regulations.
Character sense of place
Density &
Rural five-acre minimum GMA should relook at what constitutes viable agricultural
Community
default not working acreage to account for changes in last 30 years.
Character
Density &
Establish "bright lines" in law or administrative rule for
Community density regulations unclear
minimum and maximum densities.
Character
Integrating
growth planning framework
Health Into Incorporate determinants of human health, i.e., physical
does not address unequal
Growth environment, into growth planning.
health outcomes
Planning
Integrating
growth planning framework
Health Into
does not address unequal Add Public Health & Wellbeing element.
Growth
health outcomes
Planning
Integrating
growth planning framework State, regional, local governments need to incorporate
Health Into
does not address unequal environmental justice into transportation and land use planning
Growth
health outcomes decisions.
Planning
Integrating
growth planning framework
Health Into
does not address unequal More complete streets funding needed.
Growth
health outcomes
Planning
Integrating
growth planning framework Regional and State food policy development and
Health Into
does not address unequal implementation - access to healthy food for all, support
Growth
health outcomes farmer's markets, prevent hunger and food insecurity.
Planning
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 121
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic/Issue
Issue Statutes/Rules Report Recommendations
Area
Comprehensive
current update cycles for
Plan Update Lengthen comp plan update cycle to 10 years to sync with U.S.
comp plans and other plans
Cycles & Time decennial census.
are misaligned
Horizons
Comprehensive
Plan Update 20-year time horizon too
Consider 50-year or longer time horizons.
Cycles & Time short
Horizons
inconsistent methodology in
Urban Growth Develop a phasing strategy to concentrate growth
determining supply of
Areas appropriately.
buildable land
Urban Growth overly large, unincorporated Expand UGA acreage in trade for financing and develop high-
Areas UGAs conflict with GMA value habitat sites.
Urban Growth overly large, unincorporated Delay the timing of the effectuation of a large UGA expansion
Areas UGAs conflict with GMA until after time for filing a GMA appeal lapses.
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 122
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix B – Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework
Discussion Items
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 123
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework Discussion Items
Report Recommendations Discussed (No formal topical
Topic/Issue Area Issue
recommendations)
Adaptive &
lack of regional context in
Inclusive Planning Systems thinking approach - formally support regional planning
addressing issues
at a Regional Scale
Adaptive & One size does not fit all - every WA
Inclusive Planning region is difference with different Adopt "adaptive planning at a regional scale"
at a Regional Scale planning needs
One size does not fit all - same 10
Adaptive &
counties have highest carbon Include "metropolitan counties" as term with different planning
Inclusive Planning
emissions and biggest housing requirements than other counties not "metro"
at a Regional Scale
crisis in state
Adaptive & need for Tribal inclusion in regional
Inclusive Planning policy creation and planning Mandate counties/local govts must include Tribes early in consultation
at a Regional Scale framework
Cycle for Updating
& Dedicated comp plan updates out of sync
Shift from 8-year cycle to 10-year cycle for comp plan updates
Funding for with U.S. Decennial Census
Planning
Cycle for Updating
state grants have dwindled while
& Dedicated
growth and new duties have New regulations and mandates must be funded
Funding for
increased
Planning
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 124
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Report Recommendations Discussed (No formal topical
Topic/Issue Area Issue
recommendations)
Cycle for Updating no specific guidance how to
& Dedicated achieve compliance with GMA if Enable local govts to voluntarily ask for and receive more direct
Funding for GMHB finds local govt technical advice on meeting GMA requirements
Planning noncompliant
Counties and cities have far less
Cycle for Updating
fiscal capacity to maintain existing
& Dedicated
levels of regional and local new regulations and mandates must be funded
Funding for
services than they did thirty years
Planning
ago.
growing gap between housing Statewide strategy to gather data and measure potential increase of
Housing
costs and incomes housing supply under different approaches
lack of "middle" housing (duplexes,
Housing Reform zoning to be less exclusionary of middle housing
courtyard apts., etc.)
Development
Development regulations and State mandates for minimum residential densities within urban growth
Regulations and
permit processes need reform areas
Permit Processes
Development
Development regulations and Create consequences for local govts failing to process and issue a
Regulations and
permit processes need reform permit in a timely fashion
Permit Processes
Development
Development regulations and
Regulations and Update development regulations to implement comp plan policies
permit processes need reform
Permit Processes
gap between growth planning
Legislative requirement for state, regional, and local govt action while
Climate Change framework and adaptation to
being mindful of cost and uncertainty/appeals (HB 2609)
climate change
annexation policy has unclear
Municipal Conduct more participation outreach regarding updating municipal
governance roles, needs equitable
Annexation annexation policies/laws
and effective revenue allocation
APPENDIX B: REVIEW OF PRIOR STUDIES AND FINDINGS 125
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix C: Preliminary Scope of Recommendations Report
(Project Deliverable 3)
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 126
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
October 15, 2021
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
Contents
Introduction and Background ............................................................................................. 129
Identifying the Preliminary Scope of Issues ....................................................................... 130
Prior Findings and Current Legislation ............................................................................ 130
Early Engagement Summary ........................................................................................... 131
Refining the Topics into Categories ................................................................................ 132
Opportunities and Constraints in 2022 Session .............................................................. 134
2022 - 2023 Preliminary Scope of Issues ........................................................................... 135
Proposed 2022 Scope of Issues .............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Potential 2023 Scope of Issues ........................................................................................ 32
Appendix A: Prior legislation that will be reintroduced for the 2022 session ...................... 139
Appendix B: Recent bills that have become law ................................................................. 144
Appendix C: Growth Policy Framework Statutes ................................................................ 145
Appendix D: Project Engagement ....................................................................................... 146
Appendix E: Phase III issues by state statute and topic ...................................................... 148
Figures
Figure 1: Overview of Roadmap Phase III timeline and process ............................................. 129
Figure 2: Narrowing down the scope of potential recommendations ..................................... 130
Figure 3: Components of preliminary scope of issues ........................................................... 131
Figure 4: Five classes of Growth Management Act Planning ................................................. 132
Figure 5: Opportunities and constraints prior to 2022 legislative session .............................. 134
Figure 6: Overview of proposed scope for 2022 and 2023 sessions ...................................... 135
Figure 7: Relevant legislation introduced in 2021 .................................................................. 142
Figure 8: Additional legislation............................................................................................... 143
Figure 9: Recent bills that have become law .......................................................................... 144
Figure 10: Growth policy framework primary statutes............................................................ 145
Figure 11: Growth policy framework additional statutes ........................................................ 145
Figure 12: Relationship between Phase III groups ................................................................. 146
Figure 13: Phase III issues by statute and topic ..................................................................... 152
Cover Photo Credit: Washington State Department of Transportation (Creative Commons License)
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 128
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction and background
The Collaborative Roadmap Phase III (Phase III) project builds upon the findings, concepts, and
recommendations from recent state-funded reports. Past reports include the Land Use Study
Commission (1998), Governor’s Land Use Agenda (2006), A Road Map to Washington’s Future
(2019), and Updating Washington’s Growth Policy Framework (2021).
Phase III convenes a task force to review past findings and make recommendations to the
Washington State Legislature on proposed reforms to the state’s growth policy framework.
Recommendations reports will be prepared before the 2022 and 2023 legislative sessions.
Washington State’s growth policy framework consists of state laws that govern or influence
the strategies state agencies and local governments use to plan for, implement, and manage
land use policy, permitting and appeals, infrastructure, and environmental protections. The
project team identifies the laws that guide our framework in Appendix C.
This report identifies the proposed scope of issues the Task Force will consider for the 2022
legislative report, which is due on December 15th, 2021. This report also identifies potential
issues for the Task Force to address later in 2022. This will result in additional
recommendations and another legislative report, which is due before the 2023 legislative
session. As it begins meeting and reviewing materials this fall, the Task Force may refine the
preliminary scope of issues identified in this report. A final scope of recommendations report
will be issued on on June 1, 2022 to help guide the process as recommendations to the
legislature are made prior to the 2023 legislative session.
Figure 1: Overview of Roadmap Phase III timeline and process
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 129
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Identifying the preliminary scope of issues
To identify the preliminary scope of issues to be addressed by the Task Force prior to the 2022
and 2023 legislative sessions, the project team examined prior reports and studies along with
legislation that has become law or been introduced during the past two legislative sessions.
This document helps make progress toward implementing many of the recommendations
from prior studies that have not yet been addressed. Feedback from early engagement efforts
and filtering opportunities and constraints have also helped shape the initial scope of work.
Prior Findings and Current Legislation
Substantial progress has already been made in making reforms to Washington State’s growth
policy framework. The Review of Prior Studies and Findings Report, completed as part of the
Phase III project, examines the progress made on the recommendations in previous state-
funded reports and studies and identifies bills (included in Appendix A and Appendix B) that:
• Passed the legislature and implemented recommendations from previous studies; or
• Have been introduced to the legislature in previous years but have not yet passed. Many
of these bills will be re-introduced in 2022.
Findings,
concepts, and
recommendations
from recent State-
funded reports
Legislation passed
during previous
sessions
Legislation introduced
during previous sessions
Collaborative Roadmap Phase III
preliminary scope of issues -
remaining findings and concepts to
make recommendations on prior to
the 2022 and 2023 legislative
sessions
Figure 2: Narrowing down the scope of potential recommendations
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 130
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Task Force will primarily focus on findings and concepts that have not yet been addressed
and make recommendations on those issues to the legislature. There could be cases where the
Task Force determines there is value in providing recommendations on existing bills or where
new topics are introduced. We also expect that there will be issues identified in previous
reports that the Task Force declines to take up. Where this occurs, the Task Force will identify
these issues in the closeout report, which will be prepared at the conclusion of this project.
What remains is a set of issues that the Task Force will explore and make recommendations
on before the 2022 and 2023 legislative sessions. The project team completed initial
engagement, categorized issues based on how they would be implemented, and evaluated
project opportunities and constraints to arrive at a proposed scope for the Task Force prior to
the 2022 legislative session.
Early Engagement Summary
Early engagement for the Phase III project included meeting virtually with lawmakers, including
presentations to the House Local Government Committee and Senate Housing and Local
Government Committee; potential Task Force members; state agencies; and other interested
groups. Engagement focused on providing an overview of the project goals as defined by the
legislature, outlining proposed engagement strategies, and receiving feedback on the general
or specific areas or topics within the growth policy framework respondents felt are most
important to address and make recommendations for as the Phase III project moves forward.
The discussion also addressed issues the Task Force
should prioritize and focus on prior to the 2022 legislative Initital
engagement
session. Recommended focus areas included: and
feedback
• Funding local government Comprehensive Plan
updates. This was particularly emphasized given
that the legislature has passed or is considering
several bills that would increase local government Findings from
Preliminary
scope of issues
planning requirements under the Growth prior reports
and studies
for 2022 and
2023 legislative
Management Act (GMA). session
• Changes that are necessary for the 2022 session
so that cities and counties with a 2024
comprehensive plan update deadline have time to
implement statutory changes. Project
opportunities
• Providing ideas for how the GMA applies to and
constraints
different areas of the state, particularly rural areas.
This report refers to this as “adaptive planning”. Figure 3: Components of
• Local government permit processes and timelines, preliminary scope of issues
particularly as they relate to housing.
More information about the approach to engagement in Phase III can be found in Appendix D.
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 131
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Refining the Topics into Categories
The broad range of issues that the Task Force will explore and make recommendations on
before the 2022 and 2023 legislative sessions covers several different statutes. To make these
issues easier to understand as they relate to the growth policy framework, the project team
developed and defined categories for the set of issues. Each issue that the Task Force will take
up relates to one of the categories below. See the proposed 2022 scope and potential 2023
scope for more details about specific issues the Task Force may take up under the various
categories. We have also been cross-referenced the topics by statute in Appendix E.
Adaptive Planning – focuses
on addressing varied planning
requirements for urban and
rural cities and counties and
ways to make planning
processes more predictable or
to recognize regional
differences and needs
throughout the state. Varied
planning requirements already
exist, as noted by the five
different classes of
requirements that apply to
Washington’s 39 counties
under the GMA.
Given the existing variations of
planning requirements, this
covers topics like finding
additional ways to recognize
regional differences within the
planning framework, finding
opportunities to make
planning updates easier or
more predictable for smaller
cities and counties, and
reviewing the role the
Department of Commerce
should play in helping cities
Figure 4: Five classes of Growth Management Act Planning
and counties meet planning Source: Washington State Department of Commerce
requirements.
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 132
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Funding and Timelines –focuses on funding for cities and counties to implement requirements
under the growth policy framework and timelines in which to complete those requirements.
This covers specific issues like exploring options for short-term or more permanent funding to
assist cities and counties with required planning work (including new requirements) and review
of exisitng timelines to complete these required tasks.
Integrating Planning –focuses on the link between planning under the primary growth policy
framework and other important local, regional, and state planning efforts and requirements.
This includes, but is not limited to, planning completed by school districts, utility districts, state
agencies, ports, and military installations. This covers topics like how planning by sewer, water,
or school districts, for example, could be better intergrated with city and county efforts to plan
for population and employment growth.
Annexations – focuses on ways to encourage annexations as outlined within the Growth
Management Act, while also creating processes that sync well with counties and special
districts. Annexation by cities or towns is a legislative action (done at the level of the elected
city council) whereby they add territory their existing city limits. Areas annexed are typically
located within an unincorporated Urban Growth Area, or UGA. This covers topics like finding
additional incentives to annex land while ensuring coordination with groups that could be
impacted, including counties, fire districts, and other special districts.
Permit Process – focuses on review of RCW 36.70 (Planning Enabling Act), RCW 36.70B (Local
Project Review Act), RCW 36.70C (Land Use Petition Act), RCW 43.21C (SEPA), and RCW 58.17
(Plat-Subdivisions-Dedications) for opportunities to streamline permit processes and review
timelines while maintaining strong public participation during permit application review. This
could include studies conducted through the Department of Commerce to review permitting
best practices or review multiple statutes under the growth policy framework to see where
there may be overlapping requirements that could be modified to gain efficiencies.
Housing – focuses on changes to the growth policy framework to encourage a variety of
housing types for all income levels. Several recent bills, including HB 1923 and HB 1220, have
addressed planning and permitting for a variety of housing types at all income levels. This
could cover topics such as greater regional coordination in housing planning, gathering data to
understand what is being built vs. what is needed, and housing densities within urban areas.
Environment –focuses on new or modified requirements within the growth policy framework
impacting environmental regulations or policies. This would cover topics like climate change or
critical area requirements.
Transportation –focuses on new or modified requirements within the growth policy framework
impacting transportation. This could cover topics such as changes to the Washington State
Transportation Plan, incentives for multi-modal transportation statewide, and adding state
highways and highway planning into local traffic concurrency (which determines when
transportation network improvements are needed due to new development).
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 133
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Opportunities and Constraints in 2022 Session
In order to identify issues to address before the 2022 legislative session, the project team
filtered issues within the broad topics described above through the opportunities and
constraints of the 2022 session. These filters, outlined in Figure 5 below, helped narrow the
scope of issues the Task Force is proposed to evaluate prior to the 2022 session.
Opportunities Constraints
Ability to provide recommendations on 2022 is a short session. This will make it more
issues that should be addressed this difficult to successfully move legislation forward.
year so cities and counties that have a
2024 comprehensive plan update
deadline have time to implement new
laws.
Many Task Force members will be A number of bills were introduced last session
familiar with issues they will be that will likely be reintroduced this year (see Prior
considering. This may make it easier to Legislation in Appendix A of this report). It may be
collect information and make difficult for the legislature to address too many
recommendations. new bills.
Recommendations made prior to the Short time period in which to engage with Tribes,
2022 session will get introduced to the working groups, legislators, and the Task Force
legislature in 2022 even if they do not and make recommendations prior to the 2022
result in successful legislation. session.
Introducing new issues in 2022 may
make it easier to move
recommendations forward in 2023.
Figure 5: Opportunities and constraints prior to 2022 legislative session
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 134
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2022 - 2023 Preliminary scope of issues
To build upon the findings, concepts, and recommendations from state-funded reports as well
as recent legislation and early engagement, the project team developed a set of proposed and
potential topics and specific issues for the Task Force to consider prior to the 2022 and 2023
sessions. Legislation that has passed the legislature and implemented recommendations from
previous reports (Appendix B); and bills introduced in previous years that have not become law
but are expected to be re-introduced for the 2022 legislative session (Appendix A) were filtered
out.
Initial engagement and filtering issues through the constraints and opportunities provided a set
of issues for the Task Force to consider prior to the 2022 and 2023 legislative sessions
(below). Broad categories of topics and more specific issues under these categories have been
identifed. For definitions of these topical categories, please see Refining the Topics into
Categories in this document.
The potential topic list and more specific set of issues for the Task Force to consider prior to
the 2023 session will be refined in the Final Recommendations report due on June 1, 2022.
Figure 6: Overview of proposed scope for 2022 and 2023 sessions
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 135
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Proposed 2022 Scope of Issues
The proposed scope of issues for the Task Force to consider and make recommendations on
prior to the 2022 legislative session includes:
Funding and Timelines
• Growth Management Act (GMA) update timelines. Discuss and make recommendations
on whether to amend RCW 36.70A.130(5)(a) to allow King, Kitsap, Pierce, and
Snohomish Counties and the cities within those counties up to 12 additional months
(June 2024 to June 2025) to update their comprehensive plans and development
regulations. This would provide additional time to update plans and regulations
consistent with new requirements from legislations which has recently become law or
is in progress.
• Funding for local government planning. Discuss and make recommendations on
options to provide cities and counties with more consistent and permanent funding to
assist with updating comprehensive plans and development regulations as required by
the GMA. Funding will also assist during this update cycle as cities and counties
implement new and amended GMA requirements within bills that have passed or are
currently being considered.
Adaptive Planning
• Ways to simplify required comprehensive plan and development regulation updates.
Ideas include but are not limited to: 1) Commerce defending appeals of city and county
comprehensive plan updates when certain conditions are met. This could be modeled
after RCW 90.58 (Shoreline Management Act). 2) Commerce developing model codes
and/or checklists for cities and counties to use for comprehensive plan and
development regulations updates. Options for providing safe harbor or appeal
limitations when applied.
• Increased flexibility for Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRDs,
SB 5275). This includes providing feedback and recommendations on Senate Bill 5275,
which was introduced in the 2021 session.
Annexations
• Sales and use tax for cities to offset municipal service costs to newly annexed areas.
Discuss and make recommendations on reinstating the sales tax incentive for
annexations contained in RCW 82.14.415, which expired in 2015.
Permit Process
• Annual permit application performance reports under 36.70B.080. Discuss and make
recommendations on modifying existing language to make permit data reporting easier
for cities and counties subject to the requirements. Currently, most jurisdictions subject
to the requirements do not publish the required permit data outlined in 36.70B.080.
Consider the requirement that annual data be sent to Commerce to compile reports.
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 136
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• Budget proviso for the study of permit timelines and best practices. Discuss whether to
recommend that a study by Commerce be funded as part of the supplemental budget.
This study might focus on topics such as permit process best practices, existing
statutory tools to maintain optimal timelines, tools that could assist when permit
volumes increase rapidly, and how to budget for rapid change.
Housing
• Housing and densities. The Task Force is not expected to generate recommendations
for legislation on housing for the 2022 session given that several bills dealing with
housing have recently become law. However, if new draft bills on housing or required
housing densities are developed and available for the Task Force to consider before the
session, these may come before the Task Force.
Potential 2023 Scope of Issues
The potential scope of issues for the Task Force to take up and make recommendations on
prior to the 2023 legislative session will be more robust than 2022. The Task Force will have
several additional months to consider issues and engagement through working groups will be
more expansive.
In addition to the high-level topics and issues outlined below, the Task Force may take up
legislation that does not pass during the 2022 legislative session and revisit issues from
discussions prior to the 2022 session.
The following is a high-level list of issues by topic that may be considered next year. Many of
these issues are taken from previous reports and studies and will be further refined for the
Final Scope of Recommendations report. Additional issues may also be included that are not
listed here.
Funding and Timelines
• Funding for local government planning (if unresolved from previous session)
• Monitoring comprehensive plan implementation (and timelines for monitoring)
• Use of impact fees and paying for infrastructure
• Other methods for funding infrastructure
Adaptive Planning
• Updating public participation requirements for comprehensive plans in RCW
36.70A.140 (this issue may be resolved through GMA rules update)
• Review and make recommendations on state statutes, beginning with Growth
Management Act (GMA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to identify conflicts
or disconnects and how to reduce gaps, conflicts, and redundancies
Integrating Planning
• Possible new GMA goal focused on human health and well-being
• Possible new GMA goal focused on equity
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 137
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• Integrate school district and local government capital facility planning (includes
planning for schools)
• Integrate water and sewer districts, school districts, and port districts into the GMA.
• State agency responsibilities, including SEPA, Shoreline Management Act (SMA), and
transportation plans/concurrency
• Link utility districts and emergency service providers
• Military installations
Permit Process
• Review and make recommendations on state statutes, beginning with Growth
Management Act (GMA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to identify conflicts
or disconnects and how to reduce gaps, conflicts, and redundancies
Environment
• Integration of water planning with GMA requirements
Annexations
• Annexation reform focused on reducing conflicts, clarifying the role of special districts,
and providing for the fiscal sustainability of counties
Transportation
• Incentives for multi-modal transportation in Urban Growth Areas (UGAs)
• Linking WA State Transportation Plan with GMA goals
• Integration of state highways into GMA concurrency system
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 138
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix A: Prior legislation that will be reintroduced for the
2022 session
The table below outlines the relevant legislation from the 2021 session that was introduced
and passed out of at least one chamber of the legislature. We expect these bills to be
reintroduced during the 2022 session. The bills are organized by subject and include
summaries of the issues addressed. Although not a focus area, the Task Force may choose to
provide recommendations on proposed changes to one or more of these bills.
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Topical Bill Bill Summary Bill Report
Category Number
Environment HB 1099 Adds a goal of climate change mitigation to HB 1099
the listed goals of the Growth Management (Bill report
Act (GMA). Adds a climate change and for E2SHB
resiliency element to the list of elements that 1099)
must be included within the comprehensive
plans certain counties and cities must adopt
under the GMA. Requires the Department of
Commerce (Commerce), in consultation with
other state agencies, to publish guidelines
that specify a set of actions counties and
cities have available to take related to
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions
and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reductions.
Requires the climate change and resiliency
element of the comprehensive plan of certain
counties and cities to identify actions the
jurisdiction will take, consistent with
guidelines adopted by Commerce, to reduce
GHG emissions and VMT. Requires the
climate change and resiliency element of the
comprehensive plan of certain counties and
cities to address the adverse impacts of
climate change on people, property, and
ecological systems. Specifies the process by
which the GHG emissions reduction
subelement of the climate change and
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 139
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Topical Bill Bill Summary Bill Report
Category Number
resiliency element takes effect. Requires
Commerce to adopt guidance that creates a
model climate change and resiliency element.
Requires the Department of Ecology to update
its Shoreline Master Program guidelines to
require Shoreline Master Programs to address
the impact of sea-level rise and increased
storm severity. Adds consideration of climate
change impacts to the list of elements that
must be contained in optional comprehensive
flood control management plans
Environment HB 1117 Adds salmon recovery as a goal under the HB 1117
Growth Management Act (GMA). Requires (Bill report
the land use element of comprehensive plans for E2SHB
adopted under the GMA to include a strategy 1117)
that achieves a net ecological gain of salmon
habitat. Requires the capital facilities element
and transportation element of comprehensive
plans adopted under the GMA to include a
schedule for elimination of all identified fish
passage barriers. Requires the Department of
Fish and Wildlife to adopt rules that establish
criteria for net ecological gain which certain
counties and cities must meet through the
adoption of comprehensive plans.
Integrating HB 1241 Increases the review and revision cycle for HB 1241
Planning; Funding comprehensive plans and Shoreline Master (Bill report
and Timelines Plans from eight to ten years. Requires for ESHB
certain counties and cities to submit an 1241)
implementation progress report with certain
required information to the Department of
Commerce (Commerce) five years after
reviewing and revising a comprehensive plan.
Requires counties, cities, and other local
governments to consult with federally
recognized Tribes during the planning
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 140
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Topical Bill Bill Summary Bill Report
Category Number
Integrating processes under the Growth Management Act
Planning; Funding upon receipt of notice from the Tribes that
and Timelines they are planning or would like to plan, and
requires planning and coordination with
Tribes on certain aspects of a comprehensive
plan. Requires Commerce to provide services
to facilitate the timely resolution of disputes
between a federally recognized Indian Tribe
and a city or county.
Housing HB 1232 Requires cities and counties planning under HB 1232
the Growth Management Act (GMA) to plan (Bill report
for single-family residences such as detached for ESSB
dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes 1232)
within urban growth areas (UGAs) in the
housing element of the comprehensive plan.
Requires cities and counties that do not plan
for each specified housing type, including
single-family residences such as detached
dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes
within the UGA, to provide how the county and
the cities within the county will meet existing
and projected housing needs. Exempts
counties and cities not subject to the
buildable lands program from certain GMA
requirements related to planning and
consideration of duplexes, triplexes, and
townhomes within the UGA if the county or
city adopts certain findings related to lack of
infrastructure support. Requires countywide
planning policies to be updated before the
deadline to update a comprehensive plan
Funding and HB 1157 Authorizes counties and cities to establish a HB 1157
Timelines real estate excise tax density incentive zone (Bill report
within urban growth areas and provides for for 2SHB
1157)
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 141
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2021 Legislative Session - Overview of Relevant Legislation
Bill Topical Bill Bill Summary Bill Report
Category Number
the distribution of state real estate excise tax
revenues within such incentive zones.
Funding and SB 5312 Authorizes the use of appropriations to the SB 5312
Timelines Growth Management Planning and (Bill report
Environmental Review Fund to fund grants to for HB
cities to pay for certain planning-related costs 5312)
related to transit-oriented development,
including subarea plans and environmental
impact statements. Requires the Department
of Commerce to prioritize applications for
grants to facilitate transit-oriented
development to maximize certain specified
objectives in the area covered by the grant
proposal. Changes the date, from April 1,
2021, to April 1, 2025, by which cities must
take certain actions related to increasing
housing supply in order to be eligible to apply
to the Department of Commerce for planning
grants from the Growth Management
Planning and Environmental Review Fund
Adaptive Planning SB 5275 Allows development and redevelopment in SB 5275
terms of building size, scale, use, or intensity (Bill report
within a limited area of more intensive rural for ESSB
development if all existing providers of public 5275)
facilities and services confirm that there is
sufficient capacity to serve the new or
increased demand from the development.
Requires commercial development or
redevelopment within a mixed-use area of a
limited area of more intensive rural
development to be primarily designed to serve
the needs of the rural population, and sets
limits on the size of retail or food service
spaces within such development.
Figure 7: Relevant legislation introduced in 2021
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 142
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The bill described below, SB 5380, technically did not meet the filtering test of legislation that
passed out of at least one chamber of the legislature, but it is included because it addresses
permit process, which is one of the scoped issues for the Task Force to address prior to the
2022 legislative session.
Bill Subject Bill Number Bill Summary Bill Report
Permit Process SB 5380 Directs the Department of Commerce SB 5380
to work with affected stakeholders to report
evaluate local government project
review and permit timelines and
provide recommendations for
streamlining the permit issuance
process by December 1, 2021.
Figure 8: Additional legislation
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 143
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix B: Recent bills that have become law
The Legislature has passed several bills related to the growth policy framework within the past
two sessions. Reviewing where progress has been made on issues and recommendations from
past reports helped craft appropriate scopes of work for the Task Force in Phase III.
2020 successful legislation 2021 successful legislation
Integrating Planning Housing
• HB 2342 - Aligning the timing of • E2SHB 1220 – Comprehensive planning,
comprehensive plan updates required by emergency housing/shelters and
the growth management act with the transitional and permanent supportive
timing of shoreline master program housing, Housing Element, existing and
updates required by the shoreline projected needs inventory and analysis,
management act. providing affordable housing at all low-
income levels
• ESSB 5235 - Increasing housing units
inventory by removing arbitrary limits on
housing option
• ESSB 5118 - Juvenile offender community
group care facilities as essential public
facilities
Housing Annexations
• HB 2343 – Concerning urban housing • 2SSB 5368 - Encouraging rural economic
supply. Bill provides limits on residential development, review by Hearings Board,
parking requirements for low-income Interlocal agreements/ annexations/
housng near transit and addresses annexation sales tax credit
action cities fully planning under the
GMA are encouraged to take in order to
increase residential building capacity.
• HB 1923 – Provides cities grants to take
actions to increase housing supply.
Permit Process Permit Process
• HB 2673 - Infill development is eligible • SB 5381 - Addressing fish passage project
for a city- or county-adopted categorical permit streamlining
exemption from the State Environmental • SB 5225 - Concerning direct appeals to the
Policy Act if the government action court of appeals of cases brought under
relates to development that occurs the administrative procedure act and the
where current density and intensity of land use petition act
use is roughly equal to what is called for
in a planning jurisdiction's
comprehensive plan.
Figure 9: Recent bills that have become law
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 144
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix C: Growth policy framework statutes
Growth Policy Framework – primary statutes
Growth Management Act – RCW 36.70A
Shoreline Management Act – RCW 90.58
State Environmental Policy Act – RCW 43.21C
Local Project Review Act – RCW 36.70B
Land Use Petition Act – RCW 36.70C
Planning Enabling Act – RCW 36.70
Subdivision Statute – RCW 58.17
Figure 10: Growth policy framework primary statutes
Growth Policy Framework – additional statutes
Water System Coordination Act – RCW School Districts – RCW 28A
70A.100
Regional Transportation Planning – RCW 47.80 Forest Practices – RCW 76.09
Interlocal Cooperation Act – RCW 39.34 Energy Facilities – RCW 80.50
City, Noncharter Code City, and County State Agencies and Universities – RCW 28B
Governance – RCW 35, 35A, 36 (higher ed) and RCW 43 (agencies)
Port Districts – RCW 53 Community Redevelopment Financing – RCW
39.89
Water and Sewer Districts – RCW 57 Multi-Family Property Tax Exemption – RCW
84.14
Public Utility Districts – RCW 54 Impact Fees – RCW 82.02
State Building Code – RCW 19.27
Figure 11: Growth policy framework additional statutes
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 145
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix D: Project engagement
While the Preliminary Scope of Recommendations report is focused on the proposed scope of
issues the Task Force will consider and make recommendations on, the engagement process
necessary for the Task Force to make those recommendations is vitally important to this
project. The project’s engagement plan ensures that recommendations reflect:
• Diverse perspectives, including those from counties, cities, special districts, the real
estate, building, and agricultural industries, planning and environmental organizations,
members of the legislature, and state agencies.
• Outreach to every Tribe in Washington, including both federally recognized Tribes and
non-federally recognized Tribes. Engagement may look like:
o Engaging Tribal staff and technical and policy staff in working groups
o Bringing together multiple Tribal staff to discuss various topics of their
choosing
o Individual meetings with staff on topics that matter to them (they choose)
• The lived experiences and perspectives of people who have too often been excluded
from public policy decision-making and are unevenly impacted by those decisions.
Figure 12: Relationship between Phase III groups
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 146
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
We will establish working groups on specific subject topics, which will provide the Task Force
with substantive feedback, ideas, and recommendations as they take up issues. The Task
Force will consider issues and forward recommendations to the legislature.
Figure 12 outlines the relationship between the groups we are engaging during the Phase III
project.
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 147
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix E: Phase III issues by state statute and topic
The table below, Figure 13, links recommendations from prior reports and studies with statutes
that have been or could be amended as part of the Phase III project. Issues are identified by
statute, status (bills that have passed, bills in progress, proposed topics pre-2022 session, and
proposed topics pre-2023 session), and topic categories.
• You can learn more about the bills that have become law here.
• You can learn more about bills in progress here.
• You can learn more about the topic categories here.
• You can learn more about the proposed topics pre-2022 session here.
• You can learn more about the potential topics pre-2023 session here.
As the Phase III project continues, additional issues may emerge that could impact additional
statutes. Figure 13 will be updated for the Final Recommendations report to reflect updates
and changes to the issues presented. This report will be issued before June 1, 2022.
Collaborative Roadmap Phase III - Issues by state statute and topic
RCW 36.70A – Growth Management Act
Bills that have become law:
• Housing - HB 1923 (2019)
• Housing - HB 1220 (2021)
• Housing - ESSB 5235 (2021)
• Funding and Timelines - HB 2342 (2020)
• Adaptive Planning - 2SSB 5368 (2021)
Bills in progress in 2021:
• Environment - HB 1099
• Environment - HB 1117
• Integrated Planning and Funding and Timelines - HB 1241
• Housing and Adaptive Planning - SB 5275
• Housing - HB 1232
• Funding and Timelines (Also impacts RCW 82.45) - HB 1157
• Funding and Timelines - SB 5312
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 148
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Proposed Topics Pre-2022 Session:
• Funding and TImelines - Growth Management Act (GMA) update timelines. Discuss
and make recommendations on whether to amend RCW 36.70A.130(5)(a) to allow
King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties and the cities within those counties up
to 12 additional months during the comprehensive plan cycle to update their
comprehensive plans and development regulations. This would provide additional time
to update plans and regulations consistent with new GMA requirements.
• Funding and TImelines - Funding for local government planning. Discuss and make
recommendations on ways to provide cities and counties with more consistent and
permanent funding for updates to comprehensive plans and development regulations
as required by the GMA. Funding would will also assist during this update cycle as
cities and counties implement new and amended GMA requirements within bills that
have passed or are currently being considered.
• Adaptive Planning - Options to simplify required comprehensive plan and development
regulation updates. Ideas include but are not limited to: 1) Commerce defending
appeals of city and county comprehensive plan updates when certain conditions are
met. This could be modeled after RCW 90.58 (Shoreline Management Act). 2)
Commerce developing model codes and/or checklists for cities and counties to use
for comprehensive plan and development regulations updates. Options for providing
safe harbor or appeal limitations when applied.
• Adaptive Planning - Increased flexibility for Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural
Development (LAMIRDs, SB 5275). This includes providing feedback and
recommendations on Senate Bill 5275, which was introduced in the 2021 session.
• Housing - Housing and densities. The Task Force is not expected to generate
recommendations for legislation on housing for the 2022 session given that several
bills dealing with housing have recently become law. However, if new draft bills on
housing or required housing densities are developed and available for the Task Force
to consider prior to or before the session, this may come before the Task Force.
Potential Topics Pre-2023 session:
• Funding and Timelines - Funding for local government planning (if unresolved from
previous session).
• Funding and Timelines - Monitoring comprehensive plan implementation (and
timelines for monitoring).
• Funding and Timelines - Other methods for funding infrastructure – Note that statutes
impacted would depend on changes being proposed.
• Adaptive Planning - Updating public participation requirements for comprehensive
plans in RCW 36.70A.140 . (This issue may be resolved through GMA rules update).
• Adaptive Planning - Review and make recommendations on state statutes, beginning
with Growth Management Act (GMA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to
identify conflicts or disconnects – provide recommendations on how to reduce gaps,
conflicts, and redundancies.
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 149
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• Integrated Planning - Possible new GMA goal focused on human health and well-
being.
• Integrated Planning - Possible new GMA goal focused on equity.
• Integrated Planning - Integrate school district and local government capital facility
planning. This includes planning for schools.
• Integrated Planning - Integrate water and sewer districts, school districts, port district,
utility districts, and emergency service providers planning into the GMA.
• Integrated Planning - Integrate planning with military installations.
• Environment - Statewide water planning and Iintegration of water planning with GMA
requirements. Note that these changes could impact multiple statutes depending on the
proposed changes.
• Transportation* - Incentives for multi-modal transportation in Urban Growth Areas
(UGAs)
• Transportation* - Linking WA State Transportation Plan with GMA goals
• Transportation* - Integration of state highways into GMA concurrency system
*Note for Transportation topics – each of these issues could require amendments to more
than one statute.
RCW 36.70B – Local Project Review
Proposed Topics Pre-2022 Session:
• Funding and Timelines - Annual permit application performance reports under
36.70B.080. Discuss and make recommendations on modifying existing language to
make permit data reporting easier for cities and counties subject to the requirements.
Currently, most jurisdictions subject to the requirements do not publish the required
permit data outlined in 36.70B.080. Consider the requirement that annual data be sent
to Commerce to compile reports.
• Funding and Timelines - Budget proviso for the study of permit timelines and best
practices. Note that this issue may not alter current langauge in 36.70B. Discuss
whether to recommend that a study by Commerce be funded as part of the
supplemental budget. This study could might focus on topics such as permit process
best practices, existing statutory tools to maintain optimal timelines, tools that could
assist when permit volumes increase rapidly, and how to budget for rapid change.
Potential Topics Pre-2023 session:
• Adaptive Planning - Review and make recommendations on state statutes, beginning
with Growth Management Act (GMA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to
identify conflicts or disconnects – provide recommendations on how to reduce gaps,
conflicts, and redundancies.
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 150
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
RCW 35A – Annexation By Code Cities
Bills that have become law:
• Annexations - 2SSB 5368 (2021)
Potential Topics Pre-2023 session:
• Annexation - Annexation reform focused on reducing conflicts, clarifying the role of
special districts, and providing for the fiscal sustainability of counties.
RCW 43.21C – State Environmental Policy Act
Potential Topics Pre-2023 session:
• Permit Process - Opportunities to reform SEPA reform and sync with other statutes to
provide more efficiencies in the permit process while maintianing environmental and
public participation standards.
• Adaptive Planning - Review and make recommendations on state statutes, beginning
with Growth Management Act (GMA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to
identify conflicts or disconnects – provide recommendations on how to reduce gaps,
conflicts, and redundancies.
RCW 82.02 – General Provisions (Impact Fees)
Potential Topics Pre-2023 session:
• Funding and Timelines - Use of impact fees and paying for infrastructure.
RCW 82.14 – Local Retail Sales and Use Taxes
Proposed Topics Pre-2022 Session:
• Annexations - Sales and use tax for cities to offset municipal service costs to newly
annexed areas. Discuss and make recommendations on reinstating the sales tax
incentive for annexations contained in RCW 82.14.415, which expired in 2015.
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 151
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
RCW 90.58 – Shoreline Management Act
Bills that have become law:
• Funding and Timelines - HB 2342 (2020)
• Permit process – SB 5381 (2021)
Potential Topics Pre-2023 session:
• Adaptive Planning - Review and make recommendations on state statutes, beginning
with Growth Management Act (GMA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to
identify conflicts or disconnects – provide recommendations on how to reduce gaps,
conflicts, and redundancies.
Figure 13: Phase III issues by statute and topic
APPENDIX C: PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 152
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix D: Consent Decision Making for the Task Force
APPENDIX D: CONSENT DECISION MAKING FOR THE TASK FORCE 153
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Background
Consent Decision Making is a way for groups with diverse points of view to come to decisions in a
structured way that helps all members of the group to be heard. It is not consensus. Rather it is
defined by a lack of objections. It seeks agreement within a range of tolerance – things that are not
our preference, but that we can live with. Here’s a graphic from Sociocracy for All that illustrates
this concept:
Process
1. Proposal presentation
Have a clear proposal. The Collaborative Roadmap Phase III Task Force is building on the work
done in prior phases, and by working groups. Proposals will most likely come from these sources.
2. Clarifying questions
Ask clarifying questions (only!) with the goal to understand the proposal. You’re not trying to shape
the proposal, only understand it.
3. Quick responses
1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 550, Seattle, WA 98101
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Everyone gets a chance to give their opinion on the proposal, preferably in five sentences or less.
Task force members might share supporting data, propose improvements in wording or even
explanations as to why they like the proposal.
Small changes to the proposal are allowed, so long as everyone on the task force is clear on the
changes and the changes align with the proposal.
4. Consent round
Now that everyone in the group understands the proposal and has provided their thoughts, the
facilitator asks each person if they have an objection. All objections should be heard and kept brief.
Clarifying questions on each objection is allowed, but not debate.
5. Resolve objections
Discuss objections individually and attempt to integrate them into the proposal. If they cannot be
integrated, indicate this in the recommendation sheet.
Created 11/9/2021 155
File and source
- File
- 2021_commercereports-lgd-collaborativeroadmapphaseiii-final-f2fcaa54-63bf-4.pdf
- Size
- 5,153,873 bytes
- SHA-256
- 16a9d322dd08efc965b258e4f586806aab77560051f45e7ece4fed4ded489462
- Original
- No public link identified.