WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.120 Have you ever walked outside right after the 00:00:02.120 --> 00:00:04.000 rainfall stops? Yeah, but I can't taste it. I 00:00:04.000 --> 00:00:06.799 can smell it. You can taste it. Come on. You 00:00:06.799 --> 00:00:09.339 can taste it. You can't taste it. Taste the rainbow. 00:00:11.740 --> 00:00:14.269 Welcome to County Connection. the official podcast 00:00:14.269 --> 00:00:16.570 of the Washington State Association of Counties, 00:00:16.570 --> 00:00:18.949 where we dive into the legislative issues shaping 00:00:18.949 --> 00:00:21.390 the future of our communities. From budgets to 00:00:21.390 --> 00:00:24.329 public safety, infrastructure to elections, we'll 00:00:24.329 --> 00:00:26.969 break down what's happening in Olympia and how 00:00:26.969 --> 00:00:28.929 it impacts counties from across the Evergreen 00:00:28.929 --> 00:00:32.070 State. Stay informed, stay engaged, and join 00:00:32.070 --> 00:00:34.649 us as we amplify the voice of Washington's 39 00:00:34.649 --> 00:00:38.130 counties. All right, welcome back, everybody, 00:00:38.210 --> 00:00:40.149 to the County Connection Podcast. This is Paul 00:00:40.149 --> 00:00:43.359 Jewell, your host. and Government Relations Director 00:00:43.359 --> 00:00:45.780 with the Washington State Association of Counties. 00:00:45.979 --> 00:00:49.320 I am back in the studio chatting about policy, 00:00:49.460 --> 00:00:52.219 this time with Curtis Steinauer. Curtis is one 00:00:52.219 --> 00:00:54.820 of our policy coordinators here at WASAC. It 00:00:54.820 --> 00:00:56.679 feels like it's been a while since you and I 00:00:56.679 --> 00:00:58.340 had a conversation, Curtis. I was just here with 00:00:58.340 --> 00:01:01.380 Jamie, and I told her it felt like I'd just been 00:01:01.380 --> 00:01:03.880 in here with her, but with you, it feels like 00:01:03.880 --> 00:01:05.219 we haven't done this in a while. Yeah, clearly 00:01:05.219 --> 00:01:07.700 you're avoiding me. Well, I don't know if I'm 00:01:07.700 --> 00:01:12.579 avoiding you. Well, I mean, right. That was going 00:01:12.579 --> 00:01:14.879 to be my next question. Could you blame me? Yeah. 00:01:15.180 --> 00:01:17.620 No, I'm not avoiding you. I think you've just 00:01:17.620 --> 00:01:19.560 been busy. Things have been crazy around here. 00:01:19.739 --> 00:01:22.799 Yeah. Well, especially this week. It's weird. 00:01:23.040 --> 00:01:25.200 There's been several weeks this session where 00:01:25.200 --> 00:01:26.840 it seems like everyone else is running around. 00:01:26.859 --> 00:01:28.760 I have no testimony, but it's like they plan 00:01:28.760 --> 00:01:30.480 all the building and permitting bills at one 00:01:30.480 --> 00:01:34.599 time. There was a before. House of Origin cut 00:01:34.599 --> 00:01:37.480 off. There was a week where I had 14 hearings 00:01:37.480 --> 00:01:40.939 in one week. Yeah, that's a lot. And I think 00:01:40.939 --> 00:01:43.879 this week I have seven. Had seven. That's still 00:01:43.879 --> 00:01:46.719 a pretty good load. Yeah. So you mentioned House 00:01:46.719 --> 00:01:48.359 of Origin cutoff. That's kind of what we're talking 00:01:48.359 --> 00:01:50.640 about, right? That was last Wednesday, which 00:01:50.640 --> 00:01:54.099 is a huge deal for everybody. It was funny today. 00:01:54.180 --> 00:01:57.700 We had our LSC meeting, as you know. And even 00:01:57.700 --> 00:02:00.040 at the last LSC meeting, which was a couple of 00:02:00.040 --> 00:02:02.939 weeks ago, our bill tracker packet was like 50 00:02:02.939 --> 00:02:06.000 pages long. This week, it's eight. Eight little 00:02:06.000 --> 00:02:10.000 tiny pages, which is amazing. It just really 00:02:10.000 --> 00:02:13.780 changes the whole face of the session. It really... 00:02:14.139 --> 00:02:16.580 puts in perspective and narrowly focuses our 00:02:16.580 --> 00:02:19.259 work, right, and makes it a lot easier to kind 00:02:19.259 --> 00:02:22.759 of track what's really, really important legislatively, 00:02:22.840 --> 00:02:24.939 policy -wise, what actually has an opportunity 00:02:24.939 --> 00:02:27.419 to move. I'm sure some of the bills that you 00:02:27.419 --> 00:02:30.719 were tracking have died, and there's a few others 00:02:30.719 --> 00:02:33.539 that you're probably now intensely focused on. 00:02:34.919 --> 00:02:39.719 Which ones are still around that we need to work 00:02:39.719 --> 00:02:43.129 on? Yeah, so if we want to talk about bills we're 00:02:43.129 --> 00:02:45.449 still working on, I think you put them in three 00:02:45.449 --> 00:02:48.689 categories, right? Bills that we want to see 00:02:48.689 --> 00:02:51.710 continue to move, bills that we want to change 00:02:51.710 --> 00:02:55.229 or amend, and then bills that we just want to 00:02:55.229 --> 00:02:59.939 stop. I think, thankfully, I've only got one 00:02:59.939 --> 00:03:02.659 bill left in that final category. The ones that 00:03:02.659 --> 00:03:05.580 we just want to stop. Correct. Okay. Which one's 00:03:05.580 --> 00:03:07.520 that? Let's start with that one. That one sounds 00:03:07.520 --> 00:03:11.379 juicy. Yeah. So that is Senate Bill 5729, which 00:03:11.379 --> 00:03:14.319 I have been referring to as the bill that refuses 00:03:14.319 --> 00:03:18.460 to die. So this is a bill. It's had many forms. 00:03:18.520 --> 00:03:21.879 It's hard to... very succinctly say what this 00:03:21.879 --> 00:03:25.400 bill does because it does several things and 00:03:25.400 --> 00:03:27.819 none of them are what the bill did when it was 00:03:27.819 --> 00:03:30.819 originally introduced. Oh, that's interesting. 00:03:31.060 --> 00:03:35.400 Right. So you need a little background to understand 00:03:35.400 --> 00:03:38.449 this bill and what it's trying to get at. The 00:03:38.449 --> 00:03:41.949 bill's intent, really, is to provide clarity 00:03:41.949 --> 00:03:47.129 and speed up the process for project and or building 00:03:47.129 --> 00:03:50.789 permits at the local level. Part of the legislature's 00:03:50.789 --> 00:03:53.569 big push to just enable more affordable housing, 00:03:53.710 --> 00:03:56.650 which I think is an intent that we're aligned 00:03:56.650 --> 00:03:59.370 with, right? More affordable housing development's 00:03:59.370 --> 00:04:01.210 good. Yeah, I think everybody thinks that's good. 00:04:01.310 --> 00:04:04.750 Priority of counties, right? And so this bill, 00:04:04.770 --> 00:04:07.960 though, it comes in in a biennium. Immediately 00:04:07.960 --> 00:04:12.919 after the legislature passed Senate Bill 5290 00:04:12.919 --> 00:04:17.579 in, I believe, 2023. Yeah, that was the permitting 00:04:17.579 --> 00:04:21.399 reform bill. Yes. And so that created a distinction 00:04:21.399 --> 00:04:24.879 that's important to understand. It created this. 00:04:25.560 --> 00:04:28.579 category of permits that formerly went by several 00:04:28.579 --> 00:04:32.160 different names that they now refer to and define 00:04:32.160 --> 00:04:35.519 in statute as project permits. So these are permits 00:04:35.519 --> 00:04:38.800 that have to do with land use review and environmental 00:04:38.800 --> 00:04:43.839 review of not the construction of a structure, 00:04:44.060 --> 00:04:47.860 but the work that goes before that in a development. 00:04:48.060 --> 00:04:50.699 So you're talking about like a new long plat. 00:04:51.040 --> 00:04:53.800 You're talking about like a... Binding site. 00:04:53.920 --> 00:04:57.540 Yeah. There you go. A subdivision. And some other 00:04:57.540 --> 00:05:00.079 things, too. A conditional use permit, I think, 00:05:00.079 --> 00:05:02.399 falls. A planned unit development would fall 00:05:02.399 --> 00:05:05.779 in the same category. And sometimes, in certain 00:05:05.779 --> 00:05:09.579 situations, creating a necessary dwelling unit 00:05:09.579 --> 00:05:12.980 would fall under this category. Oh, okay. Do 00:05:12.980 --> 00:05:15.240 you have a different understanding? Paul, I absolutely 00:05:15.240 --> 00:05:18.740 bow to your... knowledge in this policy? No, 00:05:18.860 --> 00:05:21.579 I mean, unless you're subdividing a parcel or 00:05:21.579 --> 00:05:23.439 something like that. I mean, most of the time 00:05:23.439 --> 00:05:26.600 an ADU could be built on an existing parcel that 00:05:26.600 --> 00:05:29.300 allows residential use, as long as you can meet 00:05:29.300 --> 00:05:31.100 certain setback requirements and public health 00:05:31.100 --> 00:05:33.860 standards and things like that. So an ADU is 00:05:33.860 --> 00:05:36.139 typically more just a building permit than an 00:05:36.139 --> 00:05:38.259 actual development permit. But, you know, there 00:05:38.259 --> 00:05:40.779 may be a case where it could be a special use 00:05:40.779 --> 00:05:43.060 or conditional use where you might need to get 00:05:43.060 --> 00:05:46.939 a land use authority first. that's i think that's 00:05:46.939 --> 00:05:50.040 the issue there and i think that uh so this was 00:05:50.040 --> 00:05:53.079 the original reason this bill and several other 00:05:53.079 --> 00:05:55.100 bills that were brought in the senate housing 00:05:55.100 --> 00:05:58.000 committee were brought because there's this perspective 00:05:58.000 --> 00:06:01.620 that middle housing types and especially detached 00:06:01.620 --> 00:06:05.000 accessory dwelling units are difficult to build 00:06:05.000 --> 00:06:07.980 because of permitting barriers. And so I don't 00:06:07.980 --> 00:06:09.980 know if this is happening in counties or it's 00:06:09.980 --> 00:06:12.639 a city issue, but there's been testimony on this 00:06:12.639 --> 00:06:15.240 bill a couple times during the process that there's 00:06:15.240 --> 00:06:18.500 situations where to make a new detached accessory 00:06:18.500 --> 00:06:20.319 dwelling unit, of course, eventually you have 00:06:20.319 --> 00:06:21.959 to get a building permit to actually build the 00:06:21.959 --> 00:06:24.480 structure. But first you have to get a permit 00:06:24.480 --> 00:06:27.740 where they come and review for the impact of 00:06:27.740 --> 00:06:31.740 an additional detached accessory dwelling unit 00:06:31.740 --> 00:06:35.189 on the... you know, environment around it or 00:06:35.189 --> 00:06:37.610 the other? Maybe. I mean, it depends on the jurisdiction, 00:06:37.829 --> 00:06:40.149 right? Right. In an area where it's just an outright 00:06:40.149 --> 00:06:42.329 permitted use, it's just filing a building permit, 00:06:42.449 --> 00:06:44.129 getting a site, you know, doing site review as 00:06:44.129 --> 00:06:46.389 part of that process and off you go. Right. But 00:06:46.389 --> 00:06:50.050 if it's not an outright permitted use, right, 00:06:50.110 --> 00:06:52.110 where, again, it could be what's called a special 00:06:52.110 --> 00:06:54.290 use or conditional use or something like that, 00:06:54.430 --> 00:06:56.730 then you would have to do kind of that environmental 00:06:56.730 --> 00:06:59.850 analysis and that site review and other things 00:06:59.850 --> 00:07:02.620 to go along with it. Is there... there's some 00:07:02.620 --> 00:07:06.060 sort of sentiment in the legislature that those 00:07:06.060 --> 00:07:12.939 types of various permitting processes? Yes. Okay. 00:07:13.019 --> 00:07:16.920 Yep. And, you know, so going back to 5290, that 00:07:16.920 --> 00:07:18.620 created the distinction that we talked about 00:07:18.620 --> 00:07:20.699 between project and building permits. Yeah. And 00:07:20.699 --> 00:07:22.860 a lot of that had to do with, you know, timelines. 00:07:23.100 --> 00:07:25.339 Exactly. Timelines on project permits specifically, 00:07:25.339 --> 00:07:27.680 not building permits. That's right. You know, 00:07:27.699 --> 00:07:30.540 the project permit review now is governed by 00:07:30.540 --> 00:07:34.240 RCW 3670B, which is the statute that was created 00:07:34.240 --> 00:07:37.879 under 5290. And building permits are really governed 00:07:37.879 --> 00:07:40.750 by the codes we adopt. as part of adoption of 00:07:40.750 --> 00:07:42.649 the state building code. Well, now let's go back 00:07:42.649 --> 00:07:45.350 just a little bit because 3670B was not created 00:07:45.350 --> 00:07:48.970 under 5290. 3670B preexisted. It was modified 00:07:48.970 --> 00:07:51.810 under 5290. Okay. I'm sure that was just a slip 00:07:51.810 --> 00:07:53.550 of the tongue, but I heard it, so I wanted to 00:07:53.550 --> 00:07:55.769 make sure our listeners, I didn't want them to 00:07:55.769 --> 00:07:58.850 go, huh, 3670B was just created last year? No. 00:07:59.250 --> 00:08:01.709 Appreciate the clarification. All of these things. 00:08:02.620 --> 00:08:06.180 preempt me in this policy area. So as always, 00:08:06.439 --> 00:08:10.259 bow to your knowledge here, Paul. Well, if there's 00:08:10.259 --> 00:08:12.220 going to be real bowing involved, I think we're 00:08:12.220 --> 00:08:14.800 going to... Whoa. Well, you're the one who brought 00:08:14.800 --> 00:08:18.300 it up. I think that maybe we should establish 00:08:18.300 --> 00:08:21.060 a proper standard and a proper protocol. I'd 00:08:21.060 --> 00:08:22.680 like to note for the record for the listeners 00:08:22.680 --> 00:08:25.240 that we are alone in this room and I am now officially 00:08:25.240 --> 00:08:31.120 uncomfortable. Back to the issue. Please, Curtis, 00:08:31.339 --> 00:08:36.240 continue. No bowing meetings. So this project 00:08:36.240 --> 00:08:38.179 permit, building permit. That last part sounded 00:08:38.179 --> 00:08:41.659 like a call for help, by the way. And for folks, 00:08:41.799 --> 00:08:46.220 this is not a live show, so don't call anybody. 00:08:48.620 --> 00:08:51.860 Except maybe me to make sure I'm okay. What you're 00:08:51.860 --> 00:08:53.360 hearing is tape delayed. If you're concerned 00:08:53.360 --> 00:08:55.519 about Curtis, you can text him or email him. 00:08:56.899 --> 00:09:01.419 In any case, 5729, when it was originally introduced, 00:09:01.720 --> 00:09:05.639 attempted to put some standards on building codes, 00:09:05.919 --> 00:09:10.139 but they put it in the project permit code section, 00:09:10.299 --> 00:09:14.940 3670B. Oh. So that was an obvious error. So they 00:09:14.940 --> 00:09:17.779 were trying to deal with building permits? Building 00:09:17.779 --> 00:09:20.539 permits, yes. Okay. So you still haven't gotten 00:09:20.539 --> 00:09:22.679 to what the bill does. Right, yes. I'm taking 00:09:22.679 --> 00:09:28.759 a long time here. It made it so that if an engineer 00:09:28.759 --> 00:09:33.779 or an architect stamps the plans, the original 00:09:33.779 --> 00:09:36.360 bill, when you submit for a building code, it 00:09:36.360 --> 00:09:38.559 made it so that you could not review that building 00:09:38.559 --> 00:09:40.700 code if it was stamped by a professional engineer 00:09:40.700 --> 00:09:42.799 or architect. And it required the engineer or 00:09:42.799 --> 00:09:45.259 architect to assume liability for compliance 00:09:45.259 --> 00:09:47.000 with the local code. What do you mean you couldn't 00:09:47.000 --> 00:09:50.100 review it? You couldn't review it. Like the county 00:09:50.100 --> 00:09:52.120 wouldn't have the opportunity to actually review 00:09:52.120 --> 00:09:54.820 it for compliance, things like that? Yep. Interesting. 00:09:56.080 --> 00:10:00.080 This is what I think you're about to probably 00:10:00.080 --> 00:10:03.299 say, which is kind of a builder's solution or 00:10:03.299 --> 00:10:06.340 a builder's remedy. This is something that's 00:10:06.340 --> 00:10:09.759 been discussed for 20 years or more. Right, and 00:10:09.759 --> 00:10:12.220 it was included in no less than a dozen bills 00:10:12.220 --> 00:10:14.559 this session. And it's been in bills previously, 00:10:14.740 --> 00:10:18.779 and we've been able to keep it out of all previous 00:10:18.779 --> 00:10:21.440 pieces of legislation because it's a bad idea, 00:10:21.620 --> 00:10:26.700 right? I'm sure, you know, why don't you tell 00:10:26.700 --> 00:10:28.500 our listeners? I could tell our listeners why 00:10:28.500 --> 00:10:30.000 it's a bad idea. Why don't you tell them why 00:10:30.000 --> 00:10:32.840 it's a bad idea? So it's bad from the perspective 00:10:32.840 --> 00:10:36.200 of environmental impact. It's bad for the perspective 00:10:36.200 --> 00:10:39.379 of maintaining community character. But it's 00:10:39.379 --> 00:10:43.059 probably also not good for builders either. You 00:10:43.059 --> 00:10:45.759 know, what we've heard from our planners group 00:10:45.759 --> 00:10:48.159 is that there's going to be certain situations 00:10:48.159 --> 00:10:52.080 where because... You know, development regulations 00:10:52.080 --> 00:10:54.279 are different from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. 00:10:54.559 --> 00:10:56.480 An engineer from another jurisdiction might submit 00:10:56.480 --> 00:10:58.960 plans that would have complied with setback requirements 00:10:58.960 --> 00:11:01.700 over in the adjacent county. But in this county, 00:11:01.799 --> 00:11:05.259 this building is now, you know, six feet into 00:11:05.259 --> 00:11:09.519 the setback. Right. And now we can't review the 00:11:09.519 --> 00:11:12.720 project or say that it's, you know, say you have 00:11:12.720 --> 00:11:14.299 to change this before you start construction. 00:11:14.320 --> 00:11:16.240 But they're still going to have a point where 00:11:16.240 --> 00:11:18.559 the building code inspector comes in and inspects 00:11:18.559 --> 00:11:21.129 the... you know, construction. And they're going 00:11:21.129 --> 00:11:24.009 to say, you're six feet into the setback. You 00:11:24.009 --> 00:11:26.710 got to move this entire building six feet that 00:11:26.710 --> 00:11:28.990 way. Yeah. And that's a terrible outcome, right? 00:11:29.090 --> 00:11:32.289 That's a terrible outcome for the homeowner and 00:11:32.289 --> 00:11:35.049 for the builder themselves. So this idea that 00:11:35.049 --> 00:11:36.870 just because someone is an architect or just 00:11:36.870 --> 00:11:39.610 because they're an engineer and they know broadly 00:11:39.610 --> 00:11:41.370 what the building codes are and the state building 00:11:41.370 --> 00:11:43.509 codes are, et cetera, that they're going to do 00:11:43.509 --> 00:11:46.309 everything perfectly right. for the particular 00:11:46.309 --> 00:11:49.929 site for the particular jurisdiction is a misnomer 00:11:49.929 --> 00:11:54.360 that's the reason why we have plan review that's 00:11:54.360 --> 00:11:56.240 the reason why we issue building permits because 00:11:56.240 --> 00:11:58.860 even professionals make mistakes right there 00:11:58.860 --> 00:12:01.539 are big differences in wind shear requirements 00:12:01.539 --> 00:12:04.620 from one area to another there are big differences 00:12:04.620 --> 00:12:08.379 in snow load requirements from one area to another 00:12:08.379 --> 00:12:10.759 there could be all kinds of geotechnical issues 00:12:10.759 --> 00:12:14.100 with a site or a region that an outside architect 00:12:14.100 --> 00:12:16.299 or developer has no knowledge or understanding 00:12:16.299 --> 00:12:19.940 of and these things are really important for 00:12:19.940 --> 00:12:23.399 local community permitting authorities like counties 00:12:23.399 --> 00:12:25.860 to have that understanding of and make sure that 00:12:25.860 --> 00:12:28.740 the public is being protected, not just from 00:12:28.740 --> 00:12:33.360 a financial aspect, but from a life safety, right, 00:12:33.500 --> 00:12:37.080 aspect as well. I mean, can you imagine having, 00:12:37.299 --> 00:12:39.240 oh, it's a stamped, you know, it's a stamped 00:12:39.240 --> 00:12:41.620 application. It goes through, it's automatically 00:12:41.620 --> 00:12:43.779 issued a permit. And then that poor building 00:12:43.779 --> 00:12:45.879 inspector goes out there and says, you need to 00:12:45.879 --> 00:12:48.990 redo this entire foundation. Right. Or, you know, 00:12:49.009 --> 00:12:51.350 they don't wait for that, you know, foundation 00:12:51.350 --> 00:12:53.389 inspector and suddenly they're throwing walls 00:12:53.389 --> 00:12:56.490 up and then the foundation inspector goes, you 00:12:56.490 --> 00:12:58.549 need to redo this entire foundation. That is 00:12:58.549 --> 00:13:02.470 a catastrophic outcome. Right. In all those situations, 00:13:02.750 --> 00:13:05.490 the engineer architect would be liable. Sure. 00:13:05.690 --> 00:13:07.470 The financial damage is there. Yeah. And I can't 00:13:07.470 --> 00:13:09.809 imagine they want that liability. They were not 00:13:09.809 --> 00:13:11.669 impressed with the bill. I'll put it that way. 00:13:11.690 --> 00:13:13.629 And, you know, Bill did a few other things. I 00:13:13.629 --> 00:13:16.500 think the other provisions. originally were less 00:13:16.500 --> 00:13:21.460 concerning to us and we showed up weighed in 00:13:21.460 --> 00:13:25.059 with concerns on that first piece and we were 00:13:25.059 --> 00:13:27.919 assured the bill was not moving forward. The 00:13:27.919 --> 00:13:32.360 sponsor clearly said his intent wasn't captured 00:13:32.360 --> 00:13:35.620 in how the bill was drafted. Like I said, the 00:13:35.620 --> 00:13:40.480 engineers were opposed. Us, the cities, and FutureWise 00:13:40.480 --> 00:13:43.799 all sat together in unified opposition. That's 00:13:43.799 --> 00:13:46.559 rare. Which should tell you something about how 00:13:46.559 --> 00:13:49.600 bad the bill is. Yeah, that's rare. And, you 00:13:49.600 --> 00:13:52.480 know, we thought, okay, we weighed in. We've 00:13:52.480 --> 00:13:56.559 done our job. We agreed to kind of stakeholder 00:13:56.559 --> 00:14:00.259 some ideas about how to address permit timelines 00:14:00.259 --> 00:14:03.419 in the interim. And we thought that was it. And 00:14:03.419 --> 00:14:07.250 then the bill was exact the day of. policy committee 00:14:07.250 --> 00:14:10.409 cutoff and it was exact straight. So it moved. 00:14:10.549 --> 00:14:12.929 Yeah. And it didn't go to fiscal. Was it heavily 00:14:12.929 --> 00:14:16.230 amended to make significant changes? Not at that 00:14:16.230 --> 00:14:19.389 point. Okay. And so it went to the fore and we 00:14:19.389 --> 00:14:22.730 kind of went, what's going on? We met with the 00:14:22.730 --> 00:14:26.570 chair of the committee who would have been responsible 00:14:26.570 --> 00:14:28.669 for deciding whether that bill gets called up 00:14:28.669 --> 00:14:32.029 or not. And we talked to them and they said, 00:14:32.149 --> 00:14:34.490 you know, I know it moved out of committee, but 00:14:34.490 --> 00:14:36.899 I Wouldn't worry a lot about it. If you have 00:14:36.899 --> 00:14:40.759 concerns, express them to the sponsor. We, you 00:14:40.759 --> 00:14:42.820 know, let's talk in the interim. Don't expect 00:14:42.820 --> 00:14:46.039 the bill to move. And then there was an amendment. 00:14:46.399 --> 00:14:48.240 There's amendment hung on the bar and the bill 00:14:48.240 --> 00:14:51.799 was brought to the floor. And the bill, the new 00:14:51.799 --> 00:14:54.620 bill changed building code to project permit 00:14:54.620 --> 00:14:59.820 and changed the prohibition on reviewing it all. 00:15:00.279 --> 00:15:03.860 a stamped application to basically a prohibition 00:15:03.860 --> 00:15:07.080 of reviewing for completeness. So under 5290, 00:15:07.200 --> 00:15:09.799 there are several phases that were time limited 00:15:09.799 --> 00:15:11.879 each phase of review. The first phase of review 00:15:11.879 --> 00:15:13.740 is the completeness review, where we make sure 00:15:13.740 --> 00:15:15.960 everything in the application is there that we 00:15:15.960 --> 00:15:19.460 need to understand if the proposed development 00:15:19.460 --> 00:15:21.899 complies with our development regulations. And 00:15:21.899 --> 00:15:27.120 that is a 28 -day review period. And what the 00:15:27.120 --> 00:15:30.799 bill... does in its current form and did after 00:15:30.799 --> 00:15:34.080 this amendment was not allow us that initial 00:15:34.080 --> 00:15:36.600 28 -day completeness review if an engineer or 00:15:36.600 --> 00:15:39.419 architect stamped it. Much less concerning, but 00:15:39.419 --> 00:15:44.159 still just not a great idea. Yeah, that's a weird 00:15:44.159 --> 00:15:46.059 proposal. And it still placed liability on the 00:15:46.059 --> 00:15:50.399 engineer or architect. And even though it seemed 00:15:50.399 --> 00:15:52.399 like it solved the problem of they might have 00:15:52.399 --> 00:15:54.980 financial liability for moving a whole building, 00:15:55.179 --> 00:15:58.860 they still testified that... Obtaining errors 00:15:58.860 --> 00:16:02.009 and admissions insurance. is incredibly difficult. 00:16:02.250 --> 00:16:03.750 And typically when they're doing that, it's on 00:16:03.750 --> 00:16:06.769 a public project where the local government certifying 00:16:06.769 --> 00:16:08.990 that their errors and emissions insurance meets 00:16:08.990 --> 00:16:11.769 a standard. And under the bill, there was no 00:16:11.769 --> 00:16:14.049 sort of, they just needed an errors and emission 00:16:14.049 --> 00:16:17.309 insurance policy for an arbitrary amount. Oh, 00:16:17.330 --> 00:16:21.409 so not even a max, not even a minimum pay or 00:16:21.409 --> 00:16:23.450 a minimum liability amount. A million dollars 00:16:23.450 --> 00:16:26.029 minimum liability. Okay. So, which is kind of 00:16:26.029 --> 00:16:28.450 hilarious when you think about the potential 00:16:28.450 --> 00:16:31.750 impacts of, uh, Not being able to review a permit. 00:16:31.750 --> 00:16:35.570 But here being just a finding of completeness, 00:16:35.610 --> 00:16:37.769 that's just that the application is complete. 00:16:37.850 --> 00:16:39.970 That means that it's ready to be processed. Right. 00:16:40.049 --> 00:16:42.870 Why wouldn't someone want a review for completeness? 00:16:42.970 --> 00:16:45.370 You'd think you'd want that because if you – 00:16:45.370 --> 00:16:47.549 just because it's got a stamp on it, what if 00:16:47.549 --> 00:16:50.429 it's not complete? So my read was this was a 00:16:50.429 --> 00:16:53.309 – in -session pivot to try to get a bill that 00:16:53.309 --> 00:16:55.509 actually accomplished something. And I think 00:16:55.509 --> 00:16:58.590 they failed. I think the material effect of - 00:16:58.590 --> 00:16:59.850 Yeah, that doesn't really accomplish anything. 00:17:00.190 --> 00:17:01.690 Right. The material effect would just be that 00:17:01.690 --> 00:17:05.089 when we got to the first, in our actual review 00:17:05.089 --> 00:17:07.769 of compliance, depending on whether there needs 00:17:07.769 --> 00:17:09.289 to be public hearings or not, and some other 00:17:09.289 --> 00:17:12.190 criteria, it can be between 45 days and 120 days. 00:17:12.410 --> 00:17:16.329 And basically, we would start our 45 -day review 00:17:16.329 --> 00:17:18.230 period. And if we found something wasn't there 00:17:18.230 --> 00:17:20.130 that we needed, we have the statutory authority. 00:17:20.200 --> 00:17:22.579 to pause that, tell them they need to give us 00:17:22.579 --> 00:17:25.480 a study. And the amended bill was very clear 00:17:25.480 --> 00:17:27.460 that we would still retain that authority. And 00:17:27.460 --> 00:17:29.940 so it would just make it so that it essentially 00:17:29.940 --> 00:17:32.019 still allowed us to review an application for 00:17:32.019 --> 00:17:34.240 completeness just with no clock. Which, right, 00:17:34.380 --> 00:17:36.400 which strangely enough could actually further 00:17:36.400 --> 00:17:39.380 delay the project and make it cost more. So again, 00:17:39.460 --> 00:17:42.480 that's not in the consumer's interest. And it's 00:17:42.480 --> 00:17:44.960 certainly not going to speed up housing. And 00:17:44.960 --> 00:17:46.460 it's certainly not going to make it cheaper. 00:17:46.740 --> 00:17:49.259 And the other, so I mentioned the 45 to 100. 00:17:49.420 --> 00:17:51.539 review period. The other provision in the bill 00:17:51.539 --> 00:17:53.460 would have said that a local government, we only 00:17:53.460 --> 00:17:56.200 get three chances to ask for information from 00:17:56.200 --> 00:17:59.220 a permit applicant. And once those three asks 00:17:59.220 --> 00:18:02.220 are up, it's an automatic approval. And then 00:18:02.220 --> 00:18:05.460 a final provision in the amended bill would say 00:18:05.460 --> 00:18:08.880 that we cannot review through the project permit 00:18:08.880 --> 00:18:10.759 review. We can still review a building permit, 00:18:10.819 --> 00:18:14.890 but not a project permit. is involved with an 00:18:14.890 --> 00:18:17.990 existing structure. And it's very confusing language 00:18:17.990 --> 00:18:20.890 because it was a statute written for building 00:18:20.890 --> 00:18:23.009 permits, and then they just changed the word 00:18:23.009 --> 00:18:25.769 building permit to project. So it's really unclear 00:18:25.769 --> 00:18:29.130 to us what the actual material effect of that 00:18:29.130 --> 00:18:32.750 would be. But I think it's either nothing because 00:18:32.750 --> 00:18:34.950 we don't generally require project permits that 00:18:34.950 --> 00:18:37.670 do remodels of existing buildings. Right. That's 00:18:37.670 --> 00:18:38.890 not really in the purview. That would be unusual. 00:18:39.250 --> 00:18:42.839 Right. Except for there are some There are certain 00:18:43.499 --> 00:18:45.240 review processes where you could see might fit 00:18:45.240 --> 00:18:47.740 in there. The ADU example we mentioned earlier, 00:18:47.920 --> 00:18:49.859 it's not an attached ADU, but it's an accessory 00:18:49.859 --> 00:18:51.779 dwelling unit and you have to apply for a conditional 00:18:51.779 --> 00:18:55.299 use permit to do that in this jurisdiction. Maybe 00:18:55.299 --> 00:18:58.039 that. Or a change, you know, a change of use 00:18:58.039 --> 00:19:00.519 application for an existing structure could be 00:19:00.519 --> 00:19:03.380 something that could be implicated in that, right? 00:19:03.460 --> 00:19:05.359 Where it's say it's a commercial building for 00:19:05.359 --> 00:19:06.920 industrial purposes and you want to actually 00:19:06.920 --> 00:19:09.140 change that to residential, but you're not going 00:19:09.140 --> 00:19:11.579 to tear it down. You're just going to redo the 00:19:11.579 --> 00:19:13.890 structure itself. Depending on how that bill 00:19:13.890 --> 00:19:16.069 is written, that could get caught up in there. 00:19:16.250 --> 00:19:19.210 Or anytime a big remodel triggered somehow some 00:19:19.210 --> 00:19:21.329 environmental review, right? Right, right. And 00:19:21.329 --> 00:19:24.630 so all these are, I think, not in line with the 00:19:24.630 --> 00:19:27.069 goals and values of the legislature. Like, I 00:19:27.069 --> 00:19:30.509 don't think this legislature... has the value 00:19:30.509 --> 00:19:32.849 of limiting environmental review. That's not 00:19:32.849 --> 00:19:35.450 been our experience, right? No, yeah. And so, 00:19:35.470 --> 00:19:37.369 you know, we worked to point these things out, 00:19:37.410 --> 00:19:39.210 didn't think the bill would move, and then the 00:19:39.210 --> 00:19:41.809 bill passed off the Senate almost unanimously. 00:19:42.309 --> 00:19:47.990 Two courageous senators voted no. And that moved 00:19:47.990 --> 00:19:51.190 to the House and was referred to local government. 00:19:51.369 --> 00:19:54.579 And, I mean, even before the bill was... being 00:19:54.579 --> 00:19:57.940 voted, we knew that it would be referred to local 00:19:57.940 --> 00:20:00.720 government in the House. And so we went to the 00:20:00.720 --> 00:20:03.339 local government chair and we said, this bill, 00:20:03.440 --> 00:20:06.339 you know, all the things I've said now, and we 00:20:06.339 --> 00:20:08.220 were assured, several different stakeholders 00:20:08.220 --> 00:20:10.880 who were concerned about this were assured, the 00:20:10.880 --> 00:20:13.259 bill's not going to move. And then first week, 00:20:13.259 --> 00:20:16.599 this week of opposite House hearings, the bill's 00:20:16.599 --> 00:20:18.480 scheduled for public hearing and executive session. 00:20:18.599 --> 00:20:20.799 No kidding. And we're, what in the world? Yeah, 00:20:20.799 --> 00:20:24.140 what is going on? So there was a... I think the 00:20:24.140 --> 00:20:27.740 chair of local government, to their credit, always 00:20:27.740 --> 00:20:31.299 believed that the bill as written was unworkable 00:20:31.299 --> 00:20:33.119 and couldn't move. But there was some thought 00:20:33.119 --> 00:20:35.079 because there was such bipartisan support as 00:20:35.079 --> 00:20:37.339 it moved off the Senate floor, which I really 00:20:37.339 --> 00:20:41.519 think was a product of the endorsement of the 00:20:41.519 --> 00:20:44.160 chair of the committee it came out of in the 00:20:44.160 --> 00:20:47.920 Senate. That bipartisan support made the local 00:20:47.920 --> 00:20:49.890 government chair in the House. really want to 00:20:49.890 --> 00:20:52.730 find a way to move at least part of the bill 00:20:52.730 --> 00:20:56.589 forward. And then the public testimony happened, 00:20:56.690 --> 00:21:00.509 and to the chair's credit, there was even a moment 00:21:00.509 --> 00:21:03.670 in the hearing, because the pushback on this 00:21:03.670 --> 00:21:07.150 bill was so robust, where the ranking member 00:21:07.150 --> 00:21:09.650 leaned over and whispered audibly so the whole 00:21:09.650 --> 00:21:12.890 hearing room could hear, I guess this bill's 00:21:12.890 --> 00:21:16.690 dead. So, you know, right now... What we've heard 00:21:16.690 --> 00:21:18.670 is the bill's not moving. The executive session 00:21:18.670 --> 00:21:21.930 was canceled. There was one stakeholder meeting 00:21:21.930 --> 00:21:23.769 to see if there could be an amendment and part 00:21:23.769 --> 00:21:25.609 of the bill could make it through. Nothing came 00:21:25.609 --> 00:21:28.970 out of that meeting. Even the Building Industries 00:21:28.970 --> 00:21:32.509 Association indicated that they would like to 00:21:32.509 --> 00:21:35.309 see the bill stakeholder in the interim to their 00:21:35.309 --> 00:21:39.009 credit. And I haven't heard anything else since. 00:21:39.430 --> 00:21:42.759 I will say I'm not sleeping well at night. thinking 00:21:42.759 --> 00:21:45.240 this bill is dead because of how many times in 00:21:45.240 --> 00:21:48.019 this session we've been assured it's not moving 00:21:48.019 --> 00:21:50.779 only to come in one morning and see the bill 00:21:50.779 --> 00:21:52.440 move. Well, let's hope that it doesn't. I mean, 00:21:52.460 --> 00:21:55.660 this is a really good example of why people like 00:21:55.660 --> 00:22:00.140 you and I have jobs, right? Because left to their 00:22:00.140 --> 00:22:03.119 own devices, the legislature, you know, they're 00:22:03.119 --> 00:22:06.519 wading into what they think is a problem. Right. 00:22:06.900 --> 00:22:09.900 And that's the permitting process, which, by 00:22:09.900 --> 00:22:12.519 the way, they've created over the years. I mean, 00:22:12.539 --> 00:22:16.460 this this process that we have is a product of 00:22:16.460 --> 00:22:19.059 the legislature and it's never gotten easier 00:22:19.059 --> 00:22:21.599 year over year over year. It's gotten more complex 00:22:21.599 --> 00:22:24.519 and more difficult. And now they have the situation 00:22:24.519 --> 00:22:27.039 that they have around a housing crisis and they're 00:22:27.039 --> 00:22:29.920 looking for any way possible, you know, to point 00:22:29.920 --> 00:22:32.680 a finger, lay some blame and make a fix. And 00:22:32.680 --> 00:22:35.200 so they come up with these ideas about, well, 00:22:35.339 --> 00:22:37.140 It's got to be this or it's got to be that. And 00:22:37.140 --> 00:22:39.640 they wade into a situation. They wade into a 00:22:39.640 --> 00:22:43.339 process that they really know very little about, 00:22:43.720 --> 00:22:46.619 right? And they put out ideas in the form of 00:22:46.619 --> 00:22:49.960 legislation that just are unworkable. And they 00:22:49.960 --> 00:22:52.019 don't understand that. And so it's really important 00:22:52.019 --> 00:22:55.619 for people like you and people like me to go 00:22:55.619 --> 00:22:57.720 to these hearings, to review these bills, and 00:22:57.720 --> 00:22:59.940 to work collaboratively with other stakeholders 00:22:59.940 --> 00:23:03.200 to say, hey, this is how it really works. And 00:23:03.200 --> 00:23:05.740 this is what you're proposing. And this is how 00:23:05.740 --> 00:23:07.740 your proposal either does or doesn't work. And 00:23:07.740 --> 00:23:10.880 I'm glad that. they're listening to you finally. 00:23:11.000 --> 00:23:14.599 It sounds like in the House, or I'm sorry, I 00:23:14.599 --> 00:23:17.599 guess this originated in the Senate, they were 00:23:17.599 --> 00:23:20.000 just hoping to keep something going so that they 00:23:20.000 --> 00:23:22.220 maybe could continue working on it. That oftentimes 00:23:22.220 --> 00:23:25.440 is what happens with a bill, even one that in 00:23:25.440 --> 00:23:28.059 its current version, everyone knows doesn't work. 00:23:28.200 --> 00:23:30.700 So while it sounds a little strange, it's not 00:23:30.700 --> 00:23:34.259 completely unheard of. But at this point, it 00:23:34.259 --> 00:23:35.880 doesn't sound like there's really any viable 00:23:35.880 --> 00:23:39.279 path forward. Yes, I agree. And I agree with 00:23:39.279 --> 00:23:41.740 everything you said. I want to add what I've 00:23:41.740 --> 00:23:45.980 discovered in this conversation learned is that, 00:23:45.980 --> 00:23:48.279 you know, the legislators, I don't think their 00:23:48.279 --> 00:23:51.400 intent is bad here. Like you said, they're trying 00:23:51.400 --> 00:23:55.480 to address what is clearly a problem with using 00:23:55.480 --> 00:23:57.680 their regulatory authority over a process that 00:23:57.680 --> 00:24:01.200 they do not interact with on a daily basis. And 00:24:01.200 --> 00:24:04.259 even when, you know, some of them were previously 00:24:04.259 --> 00:24:07.880 local electeds. Even then, there's huge knowledge 00:24:07.880 --> 00:24:09.819 gaps because they weren't the planning director 00:24:09.819 --> 00:24:14.180 of their jurisdiction. And even the city council 00:24:14.180 --> 00:24:16.799 people, the county context is completely different, 00:24:16.880 --> 00:24:18.440 so they don't necessarily understand that and 00:24:18.440 --> 00:24:20.960 vice versa. And it creates all these problems. 00:24:21.160 --> 00:24:24.460 And what's interesting to me is that often we 00:24:24.460 --> 00:24:27.299 find ourselves in a position where our feedback 00:24:27.299 --> 00:24:30.799 creates this oppositional stance between us and 00:24:30.799 --> 00:24:35.000 the legislature. And it's kind of ironic because 00:24:35.000 --> 00:24:37.920 literally every jurisdiction I talked to about 00:24:37.920 --> 00:24:41.759 this gave me the feedback like, hey, we are working 00:24:41.759 --> 00:24:44.559 our tails off to improve our local permitting 00:24:44.559 --> 00:24:46.799 process and to make sure that these projects 00:24:46.799 --> 00:24:49.559 can be approved faster and easier and that there's 00:24:49.559 --> 00:24:53.819 clear direction for developers. And several jurisdictions 00:24:53.819 --> 00:24:56.200 even are like, look, we did this formal study 00:24:56.200 --> 00:25:01.009 on how to improve this process. it's ironic to 00:25:01.009 --> 00:25:03.609 me that sometimes we are singled out as like 00:25:03.609 --> 00:25:06.910 the problem when their local electeds at the 00:25:06.910 --> 00:25:10.809 in the counties and cities are working towards 00:25:10.809 --> 00:25:13.509 the exact same goal as the legislators. Yeah, 00:25:13.549 --> 00:25:15.910 we all have the same goal, that's for sure. But 00:25:15.910 --> 00:25:19.069 we all just, we don't necessarily all understand 00:25:19.069 --> 00:25:22.309 it the same way. And we all don't necessarily 00:25:22.309 --> 00:25:27.210 think, we all don't necessarily understand what 00:25:27.210 --> 00:25:29.930 the real problems are. So that's what makes the 00:25:29.930 --> 00:25:32.289 political process so fascinating and why we continue 00:25:32.289 --> 00:25:34.150 to have these conversations on a regular basis. 00:25:34.269 --> 00:25:36.150 You know, we didn't get in this housing mess 00:25:36.150 --> 00:25:37.710 overnight and we're not going to get out of it 00:25:37.710 --> 00:25:41.000 overnight either. It'll be interesting to see, 00:25:41.000 --> 00:25:44.859 you know, kind of over time, which of these myriad 00:25:44.859 --> 00:25:47.619 of strategies that have been deployed actually 00:25:47.619 --> 00:25:50.500 have a positive effect in kind of moving the 00:25:50.500 --> 00:25:53.759 needle on making housing more affordable and 00:25:53.759 --> 00:25:56.220 more accessible for the residents of Washington. 00:25:58.119 --> 00:26:01.279 That's pretty much all the time we have. I know 00:26:01.279 --> 00:26:02.759 you have some other bills that you wanted to 00:26:02.759 --> 00:26:04.259 chat about, but we're going to have to hold those 00:26:04.259 --> 00:26:06.180 till next time. Just call me one Bill Curtis 00:26:06.180 --> 00:26:08.740 here in this podcast. Well, more importantly, 00:26:08.880 --> 00:26:11.420 Curtis, well, not more importantly, but maybe 00:26:11.420 --> 00:26:14.380 also as equally importantly, today is the first 00:26:14.380 --> 00:26:16.980 day of March badness. You got your bracket ready 00:26:16.980 --> 00:26:20.799 to go. Who did you pick to win it all? How should 00:26:20.799 --> 00:26:23.839 I put this? Reluctantly pick Duke. Reluctantly? 00:26:23.900 --> 00:26:27.579 Yes. Well, no one forced you to pick them. No. 00:26:27.660 --> 00:26:31.640 No one likes Duke. But I think they're the clear 00:26:31.640 --> 00:26:33.619 favorite if you've been watching college basketball. 00:26:33.859 --> 00:26:35.480 The people at Duke University, I think they would 00:26:35.480 --> 00:26:37.579 disagree. No, I think I'd just put them in the 00:26:37.579 --> 00:26:40.099 no one category. I'm sorry to any Duke listeners. 00:26:40.220 --> 00:26:45.690 I'm just being facetious. I think Duke is clearly 00:26:45.690 --> 00:26:48.289 the best team in the country. Hard to make it 00:26:48.289 --> 00:26:49.950 all the way through a March Madness. Kind of 00:26:49.950 --> 00:26:51.490 like a bill trying to make it all the way through 00:26:51.490 --> 00:26:53.869 the legislature. I think the bill has better 00:26:53.869 --> 00:26:57.589 chances. All right, Curtis. Well, thanks for 00:26:57.589 --> 00:27:00.950 coming by. We'll catch you in a little while 00:27:00.950 --> 00:27:04.390 on some of these other ones. We've got a lot 00:27:04.390 --> 00:27:09.809 of other kind of benchmarks coming up to inform 00:27:09.809 --> 00:27:12.339 our listeners about. We're expecting. budgets 00:27:12.339 --> 00:27:15.259 next week. After that, we've got another cutoff. 00:27:15.359 --> 00:27:17.519 After that, we've got another cutoff. After that, 00:27:17.579 --> 00:27:19.680 we've got another cutoff. So things are moving 00:27:19.680 --> 00:27:22.160 pretty quickly. You could even say they're really 00:27:22.160 --> 00:27:25.240 accelerating here in Olympia. I hope you get 00:27:25.240 --> 00:27:27.099 a little bit of rest and can keep up. That is 00:27:27.099 --> 00:27:28.880 the definition of accelerating. Thank you, Paul. 00:27:29.000 --> 00:27:31.259 Yeah, well, I'm here to help. All right. Thanks, 00:27:31.299 --> 00:27:35.259 Curtis. Thanks for tuning in to County Connection. 00:27:35.299 --> 00:27:37.480 Stay in the loop by subscribing to us through 00:27:37.480 --> 00:27:39.779 your preferred podcasting app and following us 00:27:39.779 --> 00:27:42.779 on LinkedIn, Facebook and Instagram. And don't 00:27:42.779 --> 00:27:44.740 forget to join the hub, your go to source for 00:27:44.740 --> 00:27:46.500 the latest news and updates from the Washington 00:27:46.500 --> 00:27:49.200 State Association of Counties. Until next time, 00:27:49.200 --> 00:27:50.880 stay connected and stay informed.