[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6379309,"mediaKeyId","2136475-5eacf2e9b4179663eeef710cb3f969d3","parentId",2136475,"title","House panel hears bill to make Commerce approve local housing plans before they take effect","audioSeconds",2933,"startMs",160,"endMs",2934000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2136475-5eacf2e9b4179663eeef710cb3f969d3&start=0&end=2934","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2136475-5eacf2e9b4179663eeef710cb3f969d3/thumbnail_160.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6379309/Washington/House-panel-hears-bill-to-make-Commerce-approve-local-housing-plans-before-they-take-effect","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6379309-bb1d80975004847e9c462816e4d9b01c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771195093&Signature=ZylX0gsLrP8-Lz~IBltkblVJWlBIImwUWGsUhER~8IkVFwbSbd-bU-f059CpkM~5AzG0lP3p96ctx9ii-JGsrz4Y0LerAagFRPhryZKHdbLc4CyC4zX1zQ985~TKZHodMsqkBI602hihGK4pboJD7ncwHM15P6TnARAFwm8UwLai9dNKJGsgso5fQIBgxQeuQrURnnMW2Hwb~DmuoMUu-VbD~SFnzdCoOH-zwZ3ePOz22IEOS2pKN24GM2nDk9qbX8WVIgncmxvqxqXImCKRGP54YpVbjYTM6yuf-QOVu19~7ZGljFkvGAsiliFOFWu0MwljvFNcy0iTPjI~USd8rw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Housing","date","2025-01-21T00:00:00Z","article","House Bill 1235 would require cities and counties that plan under the Growth Management Act to submit housing elements and housing development regulations to the Washington State Department of Commerce for a determination of compliance before those rules take effect.

Representative Peterson, chair of the House Housing Committee and the bill’s prime sponsor, opened the hearing by saying the measure addresses the housing “supply” problem and is meant to help local governments comply with statewide housing policy. Audrey Vasek, staff to the committee, summarized the bill: jurisdictions must submit their housing elements and development regulations to Commerce within 10 days after final action to amend or replace them (and no later than six months after a comprehensive-plan update or five-year progress report is due). Commerce would have 90 days to issue a final compliance decision; until Commerce issues that decision, the submitted housing elements or regulations would not take effect. The bill also directs Commerce to publish objective compliance standards and to maintain a public list of jurisdictions’ compliance status. Commerce’s final decisions would be appealable to the Growth Management Hearings Board within 60 days, the staff report said.

Supporters including FutureWise, the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties, Habitat for Humanity, and the Building Industry Association told the committee the bill would provide clarity and predictability that helps housing developers and nonprofits pursue projects. Bryce Yaden of FutureWise said the 2020 Growth Management Act changes (House Bill 1220) increased planning responsibilities for jurisdictions and that Commerce review would provide needed oversight and allow appeals from both development advocates and opponents. Alex Hurd of the Master Builders Association and Brent Ludeman of the Building Industry Association said clear, objective state standards would help the private sector plan and finance projects.

Municipal officials and local government associations raised administrative and timing concerns. Carl Schroeder of the Association of Washington Cities said fewer than 1% of past appeals found local plans noncompliant and warned that a mandatory pre-effect approval process could slow housing delivery and create capacity problems for Commerce. Carol Heland, planning director for the City of Redmond, and Carl Almgren, community planning manager for the City of Lynnwood, said the current process — in which Commerce reviews transmittals and provides feedback before local legislative action — allows local councils to take final action after public outreach; they urged clearer drafting on retroactivity and more review time for Commerce (one suggestion was increasing notice-of-intent windows from 60 to 90 days for comprehensive-plan reviews).

Representative Defoe asked whether HB 1235 includes penalties such as withholding certain state revenues; witnesses and the sponsor clarified that a separate companion bill contains an expanded list of penalties, while HB 1235 retains existing GMA consequences and a “builder’s remedy” allowing certain affordable developments to proceed during noncompliance periods as defined in the bill. The sponsor said Commerce would publish minimum objective standards within six months of the bill’s effective date and that Commerce decisions would be appealable to the Growth Management Hearings Board.

The hearing record included multiple proponents and opponents who said they would follow up with written technical suggestions. No formal vote occurred; committee members indicated further work and potential amendments would follow.

Ending: The committee closed the hearing on HB 1235 after public testimony and moved on to other bills on the agenda. No action or vote on the bill was recorded at the hearing.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Housing - 1/21/2025 4:00 PM","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 1235 would require Department of Commerce approval of housing elements and development regulations for jurisdictions that plan under the Growth Management Act before those rules take effect.","taxTitle","Housing, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20263,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6379301,"Bill would require ‘objective reasonableness’ for local anti-camping laws; cities warn of litigation exposure",3471,3478000,6996,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2136475-5eacf2e9b4179663eeef710cb3f969d3&start=3478&end=6","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2136475-5eacf2e9b4179663eeef710cb3f969d3/thumbnail_3478000.jpg","/articles/6379301/Washington/Bill-would-require-objective-reasonableness-for-local-anti-camping-laws-cities-warn-of-litigation-exposure","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6379301-4d86b970c125cd0b5b65724707ab3a9b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771195093&Signature=L1ZlCCZHl0Tg63W3ePi0Q7Xvyh3lA7-2-9RhFVgWFi33V5MgtpUbAEwr0sK-Y-2u4RXmMxkqtjCxg-yjYe6RMc43aPJd~HygX5h-F~uVMT2zj2RG4eMcH~4nrASFWcRJmVvxKnKIte5UvuD~um3fzqx1PxUErTx3L4Z~e~SDJRJIbx1uki0Yf7G72VmdvYoU0GyJq9hSALNkIvFSjEVxjAZoNZYlD2-jvpbYThwtBSb0E7uBYzcUr9NcMf1tiTW7NvLe4OzFATh9IZC~BetmfJiwAfBmtKHXjhl8q1fz6AhJTTvv-zqrGwexdsIZuppOZSoptp~1tb6rq5E34qRTug__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 1380 would require that city and county laws regulating sitting, lying, sleeping or keeping warm and dry in public spaces be objectively reasonable with respect to time, place and manner, taking into account the totality of the circumstances and the law’s impact on people experiencing homelessness. The bill would allow a person to sue for injunctive or declaratory relief; courts could award attorney fees to prevailing plaintiffs under defined circumstances. The measure does not create a private right to monetary damages, and it would apply retroactively to local laws and causes of action that arise on or after the bill’s effective date. The bill contains an emergency clause and would take effect immediately if enacted.

Representative Gregersen, the bill’s sponsor, framed the proposal as a middle-ground approach that preserves local authority to regulate public space while ensuring local rules consider the impact on people without housing. Jasmine Clark of the ACLU of Washington said HB 1380 aligns with the U.S. Supreme Court’s direction in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson and would protect civil rights while allowing reasonable ordinances. Scott Crane of Northwest Justice Project and Columbia Legal Services attorney Sarah Nagy said the bill preserves broad local authority to pursue shelter, services and other responses while protecting unsheltered people from criminalization for efforts to keep warm and dry.

Supporters told the committee the measure would reduce the harms of criminalization and provide clarity to people experiencing homelessness about where and when they can shelter themselves. Cheryl Brown, director of operations at Jules Helping Hands in Spokane and a person with lived experience of homelessness, told the committee that enforcement and loss of identification or vouchers can erase progress toward housing. Paul Leppay of the Washington Low Income Housing Alliance and other advocates urged the committee to pass the bill to prevent fines and criminal sanctions that drain resources and worsen instability.

Many cities and counties testified in opposition. Curtis Steinhauer of the Washington State Association of Counties and Carl Schroeder of the Association of Washington Cities said the bill’s central phrase — “objectively reasonable” — is undefined, will generate litigation to interpret it, and will consume local tax dollars in defense rather than delivering housing. Several mayors (Auburn, Covington, Renton, Mercer Island, Normandy Park and others) argued the bill offers no new shelter capacity, could force cities to redirect already limited funds to litigation, and would hamstring local responses tailored to their jurisdictions. Mayor Eric Zimmerman of Normandy Park urged the Legislature to prioritize funding for residential rehabilitation and treatment programs rather than changing enforcement standards.

Witnesses described two competing concerns: advocates said the bill would protect people who have nowhere else to go and avoid punitive enforcement; many city/county legal advisers and elected officials said the language invites court challenges because there is no Washington precedent defining the term and the Oregon statute that inspired the bill drew immediate litigation in Portland.

Ending: The committee heard extensive public testimony on both sides and closed the hearing; sponsors said they would continue working with city and county officials to refine language and consider funding approaches. No committee vote occurred at the hearing.","House Bill 1380 would require local laws that regulate sitting, lying or sleeping on public property to be “objectively reasonable,” and would allow courts to enjoin ordinances that are not.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6379306,"Committee considers bill to speed permitting and dispute resolution for shelters and supportive housing",2504,1694000,4198000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2136475-5eacf2e9b4179663eeef710cb3f969d3&start=1694&end=4198","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2136475-5eacf2e9b4179663eeef710cb3f969d3/thumbnail_1694000.jpg","/articles/6379306/Washington/Committee-considers-bill-to-speed-permitting-and-dispute-resolution-for-shelters-and-supportive-housing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6379306-8c2b07f00c8d230e9bc972859cbeccf3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771195093&Signature=caGIuJSOCqpe9q83z3u2Kof52e1x65Ig0xLxAa-a~LuHLGAIkJ~IS4eE11aJqsbzD8jiPoOF76AzEQ2QV7bPElRgJXh4pJJknvuQdwk3Rjn60UodNRkE~cnrmq2nxTtf6kJNeiiyXB8-lKJBHOqsEDS740ccJ9Qgd0ZWUMg2GhJnIytgIVaAQHXFXpKEvhlGjORv7mkz9hV2eSN-3u3-YwySablQm8i2IK9epoQlGbVSvO6gJQJ6TDlKTSyR7ANFdYzbcqoTBlJdFNYrQitdX2sE5pqRP~EU5dXWDfmdi4DoceHJLT0H68ZmbOC9DA84OHhufjCKje3~fMogA34fCQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 1195 would prohibit cities and counties from denying or precluding permits for so-called step housing — permanent supportive housing, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing, and shelters — and would require jurisdictions to process step-housing permit applications administratively through planning directors or their designees.

Serena Dolly, staff to the committee, summarized the bill’s key points: jurisdictions may not deny step housing in zones where hotels are allowed or, for transitional or permanent supportive housing, in residential zones; reasonable occupancy, spacing, and intensity requirements are allowed so long as they do not preclude siting necessary to meet each jurisdiction’s comprehensive-plan need. If a dispute arises about whether a local rule precludes siting, Commerce would facilitate dispute resolution and, if unresolved, would review the record and may reverse a local decision that violates state requirements. If a jurisdiction fails to correct a violation within 60 days, the State Treasurer could withhold designated revenues until correction. The staff report said Commerce’s final decision and any corrective action under the bill would be exempt from appeal under the Growth Management Act or the State Environmental Policy Act.

Supporters — including the Washington chapter of the American Planning Association, FutureWise, the Washington Low Income Housing Alliance, Plymouth Housing, Catholic Community Services, Evergreen Treatment Services, and King County — urged the committee to pass HB 1195 to remove barriers that delay shelters and supportive housing and to provide faster, more predictable permitting. Joe Tovar of the Washington chapter of the American Planning Association said the bill promotes treating all housing types consistently and ensures timely, administrative review using objective standards. Bryan Yaden (FutureWise) and Michelle Thomas (Washington Low Income Housing Alliance) told the committee local opposition and conditional permitting have stalled projects and increased costs. Joe McDermott for King County described regional efforts (Health Through Housing partnerships) and said the bill would help the county and cities house vulnerable residents closer to supports.

Opponents — including the Association of Washington Cities and the Washington State Association of Counties — said the bill as drafted raises concerns about local control, the scope of penalties (including withholding sales tax revenues that fund housing programs), applicability in unincorporated or industrial areas, and operational details. Witnesses asked for clearer definitions and safeguards to ensure safeguards for siting near services and to avoid shifting burdens onto underfunded service providers. Several local planners and city staff said current Commerce review and early feedback processes have been constructive; they recommended clarifications to timelines and administrative processes to preserve local planning input.

Representative Peterson, who introduced the bill as part of a suite of housing measures, said the penalties are a “hammer” intended to ensure compliance but expected actual use to be rare. The committee took public testimony and closed the hearing; no formal vote occurred.

Ending: Proponents framed the bill as a tool to speed housing for people experiencing homelessness; local governments sought technical fixes and expressed concern that penalties could remove local funds used for affordable-housing programs. The bill will move forward to further drafting and stakeholder negotiation.","House Bill 1195 would require administrative review for permits for permanent supportive, transitional, and emergency indoor housing (\"step housing\") and allow the Department of Commerce to resolve disputes and reverse local denials; the bill would authorize withholding certain state revenues if a jurisdiction fails to correct violations.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House panel hears bill to make Commerce approve local housing plans before they take effect

Bill would require ‘objective reasonableness’ for local anti-camping laws; cities warn of litigation exposure

Committee considers bill to speed permitting and dispute resolution for shelters and supportive housing