[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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",6375856,"mediaKeyId","2140770-b5234bca9fa6b2cbd1de39fe33352523","parentId",2140770,"title","Counties push to raise real-estate excise tax transaction fee from $5 to $20","audioSeconds",493,"startMs",438000,"endMs",931000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2140770-b5234bca9fa6b2cbd1de39fe33352523&start=438&end=931","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2140770-b5234bca9fa6b2cbd1de39fe33352523/thumbnail_438000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6375856/Washington/Counties-push-to-raise-real-estate-excise-tax-transaction-fee-from-5-to-20","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6375856-d424f3774748148a0ee38661cb6fc7ec/orig.mp4?Expires=1770957130&Signature=e0TrJ44F0~kpbH2RSMnUvmJDW58hxiboeoSRYUfH66g0Amy~MstCNUc9IYpowSzKsI6HNT0v9f~U1GcpJA~eDGo4znsZ7vjB8k~Q~GXax04zeGycZjbDL3HVBr9WFG1hThgHIIpXgF43Kcw7gxk2b~X0IVwRT~89FpIhb1riuKlAjjcQIsQ02VSiXicLBGf-ROrfooGnrigvt2fWzVYUBT9RxQLHz-7oxJ1OwPDnQANohNTZuxkOmXf7BzGHVVwmXj5UdGr60ubtX8Alo4OEyhZF7EJqZD971O-UHpBFjJTb0~8NWvnXecrkuuHdkP9W~dC88OA5xv0Naw2ulwjs~g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Local Government","date","2025-01-22T00:00:00Z","article","Committee staff summarized House Bill 1044 as a proposal to replace an existing $5 affidavit filing fee with a $20 fee on all real-estate-excise-tax (REET) affidavits, regardless of whether tax is due. Under the bill the amount would be adjusted every four years by the Department of Revenue based on CPI‑shelter growth. Sixty‑five percent of the fee would be dedicated to county assessor activities and the remainder to county treasurer activities.

Sponsor Rep. Sharon Wiley framed the measure as a cost‑recovery step that would help county assessors and treasurers keep up with rising administrative costs. \"This is a fee that is a mere cost‑recovery element,\" Wiley said, noting counties perform constitutionally required services and have limited taxing authority.

County officials testified in favor. Jennifer Wallace, executive director of the Washington Association of County Officials, said the bill recognizes the administrative impacts of tax-law changes and supports effective implementation. Thurston County Assessor Stephen Drew testified that the $5 fee has not kept pace with rising costs and that assessor offices are understaffed; he said his office has four fewer employees than in 2008. \"This bill is urgently needed,\" Drew told the committee.

The county treasurers’ association supported the increase as necessary to cover software, maintenance and personnel costs. Jeff Gadman, president of the Washington State Association of County Treasurers, said combined assessor and treasurer offices need dedicated revenue to maintain services.

Taxpayer advocates opposed the increase. Jeff Pack of Washington Citizens Against Unfair Taxes called the proposal an example of fee increases that add to residents’ costs. \"So much today is electronic, more streamlined and more efficient. If it's costing you more to process these, then you need instead of looking into the why it's costing you more, the go to solution is always raise taxes and fees,\" Pack said.

The committee took testimony and no formal vote occurred that day. Staff and multiple county officials emphasized the fee would be dedicated to assessor and treasurer functions and adjusted for inflation every four years under the bill text presented to the committee.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Local Government - 1/22/2025 8:00 AM","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 1044 would increase the filing fee on real estate excise tax affidavits from $5 to $20, dedicating 65% to assessor activities and the remainder to treasurer activities. County assessors and treasurers urged passage; taxpayer advocates opposed the increase.","taxTitle","Local Government, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20267,"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},6375861,"Counties split over new reporting mandate for roadside maintenance records",1677,171000,1848000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2140770-b5234bca9fa6b2cbd1de39fe33352523&start=171&end=1848","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2140770-b5234bca9fa6b2cbd1de39fe33352523/thumbnail_171000.jpg","/articles/6375861/Washington/Counties-split-over-new-reporting-mandate-for-roadside-maintenance-records","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6375861-60246e29e9a55a1432df36fb7a02d4cb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770957130&Signature=LmV90YVd1IfmTEqM9r5JgxTpK-CzGa0qZ3aEAWcnv9ezyVXwxQfR7YBBoTG6khZKPDWETrUodpz7FCJ9mbO79xglLsmyOO6VaSaOXQ3We38X03YqEvVa8cWtmP2xWCpGWMoWvlYjJZOBdaNjjdZi1uyuRvj-DpZXEFpFLwxDnhe8Hjpq70IqQPuVLD~QvJ5-H9psDoTFHjOmKc8Q7~oZSTaD47hUdTeI69igz~ttEwBjwqaxdbJxGzkv7wNqMUFE8TgM55PyrdWFm21khl2pjxRBQoXbo2JV0w3D93NwPUqWRs0D5EABFVoo54iUm8BtIduW4a8-ubPQVWbvuS6tbA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Rep. Andrew Barkis introduced House Bill 1145, which would require counties to collect and retain records of any maintenance or construction activity undertaken by the county on a county road that is adjacent to or on non‑county property, including quantities of soil, trees, shrubs, gravel or other organic material removed and, if above a de minimis threshold, where that material was moved, how it was reused or disposed of, and results of any contaminant testing.

Kellen Wright, committee staff, summarized existing retention schedules and the bill’s changes. He said some county‑engineer records must be kept permanently and that environmental monitoring records are transferred to the state archives after 30 years; HB 1145 would add detailed content and retention requirements for materials moved during county maintenance.

Supporters said better recordkeeping is inexpensive and important for environmental cleanup and protecting private‑property interests. \"This information creates a database for future environmental cleanup plans,\" said Jim Gauthier, testifying for Friendly Grove Farm, who described contaminants such as tire dust and the role of county ditches in collecting runoff. He also raised concerns about preserving fee‑title rights under older roadway easements and institutional memory loss after staff turnover.

County engineers and rural commissioners urged rejection or major revision. Axel Swanson of the Association of County Engineers said the bill’s broad definition of \"public works activity\" would require records for many routine operations across Washington’s roughly 78,000 lane miles and would harm counties’ ability to respond quickly to storms and keep roads safe. \"This proposed legislation would add an extensive new administrative burden to these regular and routine maintenance activities,\" Swanson said. Whitman County Commissioner Art Swanack said the reporting and testing costs would be a \"huge burden\" for rural agricultural counties with extensive gravel and seasonal roads.

Several witnesses and the sponsor acknowledged counties already collect some records and comply with federal permits such as NPDES for stormwater, but they differed on whether a statewide mandate is necessary. Swanson suggested the policy goals could be met through awareness, training and sharing best practices rather than a new reporting requirement.

The committee took testimony and did not vote. Testimony highlighted environmental‑monitoring uses of records, private‑property protections and county operational concerns; some speakers requested amendments to narrow the bill’s scope or exempt routine emergency work.","House Bill 1145 would require counties to collect and retain records about material removed during county road maintenance on or adjacent to non‑county property. County engineers warned the mandate would create a heavy administrative burden; farmers and some commissioners supported the transparency and environmental uses of the records.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6375866,"Lawmakers, insurers and builders spar over adopting full International WUI code",0,1857000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2140770-b5234bca9fa6b2cbd1de39fe33352523&start=1857&end=1857","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2140770-b5234bca9fa6b2cbd1de39fe33352523/thumbnail_1857000.jpg","/articles/6375866/Washington/Lawmakers-insurers-and-builders-spar-over-adopting-full-International-WUI-code","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6375866-072c0b53d005f48d0a958d7dd0b774ba/orig.mp4?Expires=1770957130&Signature=V7qxQVutpO6eteGGkzVWsPYBsr96NfXpcbMqYU~AyMvgUeU53v6-NxMJ9wbAmCPq8QqZLJ1N5t2OManeJgdQwA3jn5ChJvNqZ0K-J7V1~hZWXwq3CFlafUmllyTVjG5RJekv98p0vUMowbw7~bXVrdI-YTfCxgKqb-o-hqVu4xbv6Sy6b5li27h9SmiVQN5U38TeoPK-BoqOGmnAvAMc6nFR6LK~vxkU0HszG-AOoLiycDJ-29mthvZgQvWX4iweloA~ZGjZ8-AURaGPeHoSjE2hUakkX1-YL0O0pNR59qRbS2awzP-gkg3SnF~2wN88gX1tocKbglhuFGvVYXSToQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Divina Deuer opened the public hearing on House Bill 1254, which would incorporate the International Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Code into Washington's state building code and allow the State Building Code Council (SBCC) to adopt the code for the state.

The Office of the Insurance Commissioner told the committee the bill should reduce wildfire risk and could improve insurance availability by establishing uniform building-material and defensible-space standards. \"Anything that you can do to uniformly reduce the risk and the spread of wildfire from wild lands to the urban communities will have a positive impact on premiums,\" said Rory Payne Donovan, Office of Insurance Commissioner (testifying with David Ford).

Opponents included builders, environmental groups and local officials who said the international WUI model code contains technical defensible-space rules that are inappropriate for Washington's varied landscapes and may conflict with state environmental protections. \"The international code’s defensible-space chapters, which use 30-to-100-foot buffers, do not reflect the body of wildfire science or Washington’s environment,\" said Lynn Fitzhugh of Restoring Earth Connection. The Department of Ecology warned that mandatory vegetation-clearing requirements could conflict with wetland and riparian protections and urged language that preserves local land‑use safeguards.

Several witnesses urged more technical work and better maps before adopting the full code. Testifiers said DNR-derived WUI maps used previously produced implausible results—e.g., urban sites mapped as higher risk than wooded parcels—and they urged the SBCC to convene broad technical advisory groups before final rulemaking. Dustin Kurban, managing director for the State Building Code Council, said the council supports the bill's intent and that off-cycle rulemaking would be required to adopt the WUI code sooner than the normal code cycle.

Builders and housing advocates warned of cost and housing-supply impacts if the WUI code's building and system requirements are applied in full. \"Estimates here in Washington state put the incremental cost closer to $24,000–$25,000 per home in WUI areas,\" said Morgan Irving of the Association of Washington Business. The Building Industry Association also urged a slower, more inclusive process; Ron Perkowitz of the Kitsap Building Association said current maps already are prompting some insurers to cancel coverage in localized areas.

Environmental and wildfire-resilience witnesses disputed whether large defensible-space clearings reduce home loss; several urged focusing on \"home hardening\"—upgrading building materials and details close to the structure—rather than broad clearing. Charlotte Parsons of Black Hills Audubon asked the committee to require the SBCC to consult national wildfire-science experts and to ask insurers what they require to continue offering coverage in high-risk areas.

Representative Griffey pressed multiple witnesses on whether publishing risk scores or maps would prompt insurers to deny or cancel coverage. David Ford of the Office of the Insurance Commissioner said insurers already use proprietary wildfire‑risk models and that a robust WUI code could help some communities be seen as lower risk.

SBCC staff explained the council's planned technical-advisory approach and invited stakeholders to apply to its advisory groups. Ecology said the agency was willing to develop guidance to help reconcile defensible-space requirements with wetlands and riparian protections. SBCC staff estimated off-cycle rulemaking would cost roughly $20,000 and said an update aligned with the 2024 code cycle would produce an implementation date around Nov. 1, 2026, if the full adoption waited for that cycle.

The committee heard a mix of support and caution: supporters emphasized reduced risk and insurance benefits, while numerous testifiers urged delay until maps, science-based defensible-space guidance, and a broader, better‑resourced SBCC process are in place. The committee took testimony and did not take a final vote during the hearing.","A public hearing on House Bill 1254 drew support from the state insurance regulator and opposition from builders, environmental groups and some local officials over defensible-space rules, mapping accuracy and implementation costs.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Counties push to raise real-estate excise tax transaction fee from $5 to $20

Counties split over new reporting mandate for roadside maintenance records

Lawmakers, insurers and builders spar over adopting full International WUI code