The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires fast-growing cities and counties to develop a comprehensive plan to manage their population growth. During this legislative session, proposals to update, change and add to GMA have been fast and furious during the first week of the session.
WSAC is tracking three significant bills that could have profound impacts on the planning requirements for GMA counties. Two of the bills propose adding a new climate change and resiliency goal to the GMA.
New Goals
The first bill, HB 2427, adds climate change and resiliency as a goal for all GMA planning counties. However, contained within the specific language of the goal are new sweeping requirements for measuring comprehensive plans and development regulations under the lens of climate change.
While a worthy and laudable goal, adding and reconfiguring comprehensive plans and their implementing development codes to address climate change as a new deliverable in the GMA will be a massive undertaking by counties.
Specific Goals Go Further
The second bill is HB 2609/SB 6335. This bill is more complex and specific than HB 2427, going farther by requiring that a percentage of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals be assigned to each county. It also requires a percentage share of the state’s per capita vehicle miles traveled reduction goals be assigned in the same way. Counties are to be held responsible for meeting those goals and planning efforts must be designed to achieve them.
There are some significant differences between HB 2427 and HB 2609/SB 6335. The more complex version (HB 2609/SB6335) is selective in that it only applies to the 11 most urban counties in the state. It also includes valuable safe harbor protections from third-party appeals that can lead to costly litigation.
Salmon Recovery and Restoration
The final bill, HB 2549, suggests Salmon Recovery and Restoration as a new goal for the GMA.
Of the three proposals, HB 2549 is the most sweeping. Unlike the other bills, this proposal would likely upset the current principle of balance among the goals in the GMA. It appears to require that all elements of a county’s comprehensive plan be measured against one, the newly required element of salmon recovery. Essentially, it creates an overarching priority of salmon recovery for every GMA-compliant comprehensive plan.
This bill also incorporates a new standard of net ecological gain. It would throw out the old standard that requires planning, development regulations – ultimately projects – do no harm to the environment. It would replace it with a new standard that improvement must be achieved, not just that projects do no harm. Improvements, or gains, would be required for salmon recovery and restoration as well as for other ecological considerations.
There is much to be considered in these dramatic legislative proposals to add goals to the GMA. The effort needed to achieve them, should they pass, will be something that counties will have to focus on in the coming years.
The cost to achieve them will likely be in the hundreds of millions for counties alone. Add to that the cost to GMA cities, and it is likely billions. All three of these proposals are scheduled for hearings in the coming week.
Follow these bills:
HB 2427 (Hearing scheduled January 23)
