Senate Bill Report — EHB 2294, Negative Use Restrictions (Senate Committee, February 18, 2026)
Summary
This is the Senate Bill Report on EHB 2294, as of February 18, 2026, for the Senate Committee on Business, Trade & Economic Development. The title is an act relating to prohibiting negative use restrictions on real property that have the effect of limiting consumer access to food and medicine, and the report states the bill passed the House on 2/13/26, 69-25. The brief summary says the bill prohibits agreements that restrict the use of property for a grocery store or pharmacy, includes exceptions for temporary restrictions, and requires notice of an agreement with enforcement by the attorney general and local governments through judicial action.
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
“Senate Bill Report — EHB 2294, Negative Use Restrictions (Senate Committee, February 18, 2026).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2026-02-19-a33947-d297179-2294-e-sba-bte-26-c2b7c1e1e5/
, SHA-256 7572f4432bcebfb6d022e1c3eac4b6bdfb67df0c58c4102ef3c361a2fcd26de7.Full text
SENATE BILL REPORT
EHB 2294
As of February 18, 2026
Title: An act relating to prohibiting negative use restrictions on real property that have the effect
of limiting consumer access to food and medicine.
Brief Description: Prohibiting negative use restrictions on real property that have the effect of
limiting consumer access to food and medicine.
Sponsors: Representatives Farivar, Zahn, Berry, Parshley, Ryu, Tharinger, Reeves, Reed,
Ramel, Obras, Cortes, Nance, Street, Duerr, Kloba, Taylor, Doglio, Gregerson, Scott,
Goodman, Macri, Fosse, Thai, Pollet, Bernbaum and Salahuddin.
Brief History: Passed House: 2/13/26, 69-25.
Committee Activity: Business, Trade & Economic Development: 2/19/26.
Brief Summary of Bill
• Prohibits agreements that impose restrictions on real property that
prevent or restrict the use of the property for a grocery store or
pharmacy.
• Includes exceptions for temporary restrictions for grocery stores or
pharmacies relocating nearby or within a retail center, which may be
modified by local governments.
• Requires notice of an agreement and creates an enforcement mechanism
for the attorney general and local governments through judicial action.
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, TRADE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Staff: William Bridges (786-7312)
Background: By using negative use restrictions, private parties may agree to restrict the
use of real property through contracts, deed restrictions, restrictive covenants, leases,
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative
members in their deliberations. This analysis is not part of the legislation nor does it
constitute a statement of legislative intent.
Senate Bill Report -1- EHB 2294
memoranda of leases, or other recorded or unrecorded instruments. Several local
jurisdictions in Washington, such as Bellingham, Kent, and Seattle, have enacted
ordinances prohibiting negative use restrictions on real property if the restrictions regard
grocery stores, drug stores, or pharmacies.
Summary of Bill: Prohibiting Specified Negative Use Restrictions on Real Property.
Subject to exceptions, a private agreement that imposes a negative use restriction upon real
property so as to prohibit or restrict the use of the property for a grocery store or pharmacy
when the use would otherwise be permitted under applicable law, is declared to be against
public policy, prohibited, void, and unenforceable on or after the effective date of the bill.
The prohibition:
• applies to any private agreement incorporated into a contract, deed restriction,
restrictive covenant, lease, memorandum of lease, or any other recorded or
unrecorded instrument;
• includes a private agreement limiting the size of a grocery store or pharmacy; and
• applies to negative use restrictions that prohibit or restrict the use of real property for
a pharmacy alone and to negative use restrictions that prohibit or restrict the use of
real property for a drug store that includes a pharmacy within the establishment.
Creating Exceptions. Existing Restriction Exception. The prohibition does not apply to an
agreement imposing a negative use restriction that became effective prior to the effective
date of the bill.
Relocation Exception. The prohibition does not apply to an agreement imposing a negative
use restriction prohibiting or restricting the use of real property for a grocery store or
pharmacy after an owner or operator of a grocery store or pharmacy discontinues operations
of the grocery store or pharmacy on the property for the purpose of relocating the grocery
store or pharmacy, if the following conditions are met:
• when compared to the discontinued store, the relocated store or pharmacy is similar in
size or larger and similar in the scope of products sold;
• the relocated grocery store or pharmacy is located within two miles of the
discontinued site, subject to local modification;
• relocation and the commencement of operations at the new site occur within two
years following the discontinued store or pharmacy's closure, subject to force majeure
and local modification; and
• the negative use restriction imposed on the prior site does not have a term in excess of
five years from the date of the closure, subject to local modification.
Retail Center Exception. The prohibition does not apply to an agreement imposing a
negative use restriction prohibiting or restricting the use of real property for a grocery store
or pharmacy in order to limit competition or conflicting uses within the confines of a retail
center by allowing only a limited number of grocery stores or pharmacies within the retail
center. However, it remains unlawful for any owner or operator who discontinues grocery
Senate Bill Report -2- EHB 2294
store or pharmacy use at a site within a retail center for a period exceeding one year, subject
to local modification and the separate relocation exception, to enforce a negative use
restriction prohibiting or restricting grocery store or pharmacy uses within the center.
Allowing Modifications by Local Governments. Upon the written request of an owner or
operator and the requestor's presentation of evidence establishing extenuating circumstances
that demonstrate good cause for the extension, a city, town, or county may, by written
determination, extend the following requirements as they apply to the requestor:
• for the relocation exception, that the relocated grocery store or pharmacy is located
within two miles of the discontinued site is changed to no more than five miles;
• for the relocation exception, that relocation and commencement of operations at the
new site occurs within two years following the discontinued store or pharmacy's
closure;
• for the relocation exception, that the negative use restriction imposed on the prior site
not have a term in excess of five years from the date of the closure; and
• for the retail center exception, the one-year limit for an owner or operator who
discontinues grocery store or pharmacy use at a site within a retail center for
enforcing a negative use restriction prohibiting or restricting grocery store or
pharmacy uses within the retail center.
Factors for considering good cause include but are not limited to the following:
• maintaining or increasing food and medicine access in the surrounding area, including
the area around the discontinued site;
• needs related to financing and construction for the new location; and
• promoting private investment in the surrounding area.
Requiring Notifications. A party who enters a private agreement that imposes a negative use
restriction upon real property so as to prohibit or restrict the use of the property for a
grocery store or pharmacy when the use would otherwise be permitted by law, must within
ten days of entering the private agreement, notify the attorney general and the appropriate
local jurisdiction.
Providing for Enforcement by the Attorney General and Local Governments. The attorney
general or a city, town, or county may judicially enforce the prohibition of negative use
restrictions, including declaratory relief, injunctive relief, or other legal or equitable
remedies. A city or town may enforce the prohibition with respect to real property located in
the city or town. A county may only enforce the prohibition with respect to real property
located in an unincorporated area of the county.
Nothing in the bill prevents a city, town, or county from enacting or enforcing an ordinance
imposing a civil penalty, or authorizing other relief, for a violation of a local ordinance that
is similar to the prohibition in the bill.
Appropriation: None.
Senate Bill Report -3- EHB 2294
Fiscal Note: Requested on February 17, 2026.
Creates Committee/Commission/Task Force that includes Legislative members: No.
Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Senate Bill Report -4- EHB 2294
File and source
- File
- 2026-02-19_a33947_d297179_2294-e-sba-bte-26.pdf
- Size
- 59,982 bytes
- SHA-256
- 7572f4432bcebfb6d022e1c3eac4b6bdfb67df0c58c4102ef3c361a2fcd26de7
- Original
- No public link identified.