Environment & Water

Session Overview

With an enlarged Democratic majority in both the Senate and House, the environmental community was poised to and succeeded in passing significant legislation – in fact, all four of their top priorities passed. Three of these bills dealt with flame retardant materials in clothing, energy efficiency and securing an additional $100 million for wildlife and recreation programs.

The fourth bill was also an AWC Priority issue – advancing proposals that help clean up the Puget Sound while preserving local land use authority. ESSB 5372, creating the Puget Sound Partnership, will immediately impact all cities located in the 12 counties ringing the Puget Sound. This bill reshuffles and focuses the statewide effort to clean up and protect the Sound’s health by 2020 – a very ambitious and costly goal.

This Governor request legislation was crafted in close consultation with local government officials. AWC supported its passage because cities support the clean up effort and the bill does not create new mandates – at least not yet. The plan to be developed will emerge in the fall of 2008.

If the plan includes proposals to upgrade or change local land use, environmental protection or infrastructure systems at the city or town level (which we anticipate it will), such recommendations must be considered and adopted by the Legislature. Impacted cities will have numerous opportunities over the coming months to engage in discussions about this effort and AWC will soon develop an information exchange mechanism to help keep them informed.

Heading into the session, AWC had two other priorities in the environmental policy arena. One priority was an effort to help smaller rural cities manage residential yard debris (SSB 6081). As of January 1, 2007, residents in cities and towns under 5,000 that are located in any of the 29 GMA-planning counties are no longer allowed to burn residential yard waste because of air quality concerns. Larger cities in GMA-planning counties have had this restriction for a number of years. The restriction was delayed in small cities for a number of years in anticipation that alternatives (such as composting) would be implemented by 2007 in a cost-effective manner. SB 6081 was introduced, amended and unanimously passed by the Senate. This bill would have extended the authority to burn for many of these cities and would have directed the Department of Ecology to evaluate the practicality and need for alternatives.

The bill lacked strong supporters in the House and failed to pass there. Instead, funds from the Capital Budget were provided to evaluate alternatives over the interim and to create a work group to identify alternatives to burning. Please see the article on SSB 6081 below.

The other AWC priority was to monitor and look for opportunities to facilitate implementation of the state’s new NPDES Phase II Stormwater Permit impacting 101 cities across the state. The permit has been under development for several years and was adopted in mid-February. Some of the affected cities opposed specific parts of the permit.

A group of at least 32 of the 101 impacted cities filed an appeal challenging specific parts of the permit. As that litigation moves forward, AWC appreciates that the Gregoire Administration and Department of Ecology (DOE) in particular were strong advocates for state funding to help implement this new permit. This funding was provided in the recently adopted budget. Additionally, DOE has contracted with AWC to provide, in consultation with the Washington State Association of Counties, information and training for elected officials regarding permit implementation.

Unlike the last several sessions, no significant water resources legislation was introduced or considered. Water resources issues are of great interest to many cities either in need of additional water rights or to those on guard to protect rights they currently hold.

Finally, as in past sessions, AWC was on the lookout for new mandates or requirements to address environmental issues. Other than those contained in the yet-to-be-developed Puget Sound clean up plan, there do not appear to be any new mandates of concern to cities and towns.

Looking to Next Session

There will not likely be any updates on the status of municipal stormwater permit litigation prior to next session. If there are significant developments, AWC will likely ask legislators to take a good look at the issues. There likely will not be much detail emerging from the new Puget Sound Partnership’s Recovery Plan until after the 2008 session, but there may be issues that emerge for discussion and possible consideration by the Legislature in 2008.

AWC will continue to probe for ways to clarify city and town responsibilities within the GMA mandate to find and consider “best available science” when adopting or updating local critical area regulations. We will also closely monitor progress made by those cities or towns updating Shoreline Master Programs using the most recent state rules and guidance.

With public attention focusing more on issues surrounding global warming and climate, it is likely this topic will find its way into a growing number of public policy and fiscal issues.

Water resource issues like protection of instream flows, protection of fish habitat, and modification of "use it or lose it" provisions for agriculture have not gone away and have not been resolved. It is not yet clear whether or not anyone wants to try to resolve these issues in 2008, which is a short session before an election cycle.

Major Bills

Puget Sound Partnership (ESSB 5372)

This bill triggers a significant reshuffling of state, local and federal efforts to identify and address issues and actions that are negatively impacting the health of the Puget Sound. A new state agency, the Puget Sound Partnership (Partnership), will replace the current Puget Sound Action Team. The Partnership will be responsible for integrating the work of state, local and federal governments, as well as local watershed planning and salmon recovery efforts.

There will be renewed and more concentrated efforts to engage local "stakeholders" in taking action to help this clean-up effort. All cities in the 12 counties bordering the sound will be called upon to share in this effort. AWC will likely help organize discussion groups among interested cities as a means of facilitating information exchange and input within this new process.

For more information contact Dave Williams, davew@awcnet.org.

[C 341 L 07; Effective Date: July 1, 2007]

Minor Bills

Reclaimed Water (E2SSB 6117)

This bill promotes water re-use with numerous provisions for water rights protection, financial support and requirements for public entities to use reclaimed water for non-potable uses. Governor Gregoire vetoed Section 4 of E2SSB 6117 because of the portion of Section 4 that changes the standard for mitigating impairment of existing water rights. The Governor is also directing the Department of Ecology to work with legislative leadership to address water right impairment from water reuse projects and reclaimed water planning issues raised in this bill and to provide a report and recommendations to the Governor and appropriate standing committees of the legislature by December 31, 2007. The bill is generally supported by AWC and a number of cities actively engaged in the development of reclaimed water.

[C 445 L 07; Effective Date: July 22, 2007]

Expediting Toxic Site Clean Ups (SHB 1761)

This bill reaffirms the goal and intent of the 1988 initiative that created the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) to raise funds to clean up hazardous waste sites and to prevent the creation of future hazards due to improper disposal of toxic wastes into the state's lands and waters. SHB 1761 also accelerates clean-up efforts with the goal of cleaning up all currently known sites within ten years.

[C 446 L07; Effective Date: July 22, 2007]

Authorizing the Creation of Marine Resource Committees (SHB 2049)

This bill authorizes each county bordering Puget Sound to establish a Marine Resource Committee (committee) to address the needs of the marine ecosystem local to that county (similar to the committees established by the Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative). The bill requires cooperation with cities and local special districts in the creation of the committee.

[C 344 L 07; Effective Date: July 22, 2007]

Concerning Shellfish Protection Programs (SB 5778)

SB 5778 requires local districts to implement shellfish protection programs when shellfish beds are polluted. County legislative authorities that are required to create shellfish protection districts and establish shellfish protection programs must initiate implementation of these shellfish protection programs within 60 days after they are established.

[C 150 L 07; Effective Date: July 22, 2007]

Bills that Failed

AWC Priority - Residential Yard Waste Burning in Small Cities (SSB 6081)

SSB 6081 failed to pass the Legislature but we were successful in getting legislators in both chambers, as well as the Department of Ecology, to acknowledge that the current law (which allows burning some places and not others) may not make “perfect” sense.

While the bill did not pass, with the leadership and persistence of Sen. Linda Evans Parlette (R-Wenatchee), the following provisions were included in the state’s Capital Budget:

• Up to $2,000,000 for grants to local governments to provide alternatives to backyard burning of organic materials. Priority for these grants will be given to:
  • Urban growth areas of fewer than 5,000 people affected by the January 1, 2007, ban on outdoor burning;
  • Projects that develop infrastructure for an on-going program; and
  • Projects that coordinate regionally. It is anticipated that these funds will be available for use by this Fall.
• Up to $75,000 for the Department of Ecology (Ecology) to convene a work group with representatives of affected stakeholders to assess opportunities, other than burning, to manage vegetative solid waste and recommend best management practices, consistent with good solid waste management practices, that work for smaller communities. Ecology is required to provide the recommendations to affected cities and to the appropriate standing committees of the Legislature. The work group recommendations must be completed by December 31, 2007.

AWC will work with Ecology to organize this work group and, as a first step, we are jointly planning on holding one or more “listening sessions” for communities impacted by the ban.

Inventory and Inspection Program for On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems in Cities (SHB 1650)

This bill would have required the cities of Vancouver, Longview and cities with 31,000 or more in population east of the Cascades to conduct an inventory of properties that use septic systems and to establish an inspection program for those systems.

Exempting Normal Maintenance from Shorelines Permitting (HB 1241)

HB 1241 would have exempted normal maintenance from the definition of substantial development under the Shorelines Management Act.

Water Quantity (HB 1453, HB 2002)

These two bills dealt with finer points of our complex water laws. HB 1453 would have directed the Department of Ecology

1. To approve changes in the point of diversion under a water right from any point within a pool, or hydraulically connected groundwater, to any other point within the same pool, or hydraulically connected groundwater, and;
2. To adopt a conclusive presumption that the changes do not impair any other water right and are in the public interest.

HB 2002 would have phased out building permit moratoriums for cities with unprocessed water right permit applications.

Water Quality/Shellfish Protection (HB 1595, HB 1928)

HB 1595 would have expanded requirements and planning processes related to Shellfish Protection Districts and HB 1928 would have directed counties to expedite shellfish protection efforts. However, shellfish protections were passed (see SB 5778 above).

Building Permit Moratoriums (SB 5073)

This bill would have phased out building permit moratoriums for cities with unprocessed water right permit applications. We appreciate Sen. Honeyford’s (D-Sunnyside) effort to raise this issue, which is frustrating many jurisdictions unable to get new permits but needing to respond to growth.

Expanding SEPA to Address Human Health (HB 1355)

This bill would have required every state and local agency to revise their regulations and procedures to ensure that each project and non-project SEPA review consider “physical, mental, economic, and the social well-being of the community.”

[ previous article ] [ return to top ] [ next article ]