Category Archives: 1st Hearing Opposite House

HB1846

HB1846 – Creating a new process for acquiring up to five hybrid diesel-electric ferries.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Fey (D; 21st District; Tacoma) (Co-Sponsors Lekanoff, Ramel & Tharinger – Ds; Barkis, Hutchins & Caldier – Rs)
Current status – Had a hearing in the House Transportation Committee at 4:00 PM on Monday March 20th.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
SB5760 is a companion bill in the Senate.

Summary –
The bill would allow acquiring up to five hybrid diesel-electric ferries using a using a one or two contract procurement approach. (This would replace the current three stage request for proposals process, which includes a requirement that the vessels be built in Washington.) The new contracts would be for a minimum of two vessels, with options for up to five. They could be acquired through a design-build or design-bid-build process, or leased with an option to buy. The evaluation criteria might include a credit between 5% and 10% of the proposal for vessels constructed in Washington, as well as adjustments for the additional costs of transport and owner oversight for construction at ship yards located at a greater distance from Seattle; for meeting state requirements about apprenticeships or other state or federal equivalents; and for meeting water pollution control requirements.

Contracts eligible for Federal funds would have to comply with Federal disadvantaged business enterprise targets as outlined by the awarding agency. The Department would have to contract with third-party experts with knowledge of and experience with inland waterways, Puget Sound vessel operations, the propulsion system of the new vessels, and Washington state ferries operations to perform project quality oversight and report to the transportation committees of the Legislature and to OFM twice a year on project schedule, risks, and project budget; to assist with the management of change order requests; and to advise on contract and technical matters.

HB1518

HB1518 – Allows state agencies to purchase paper made with lower CO2 emissions as well as 100% recycled paper.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Stonier (D; 49th District; Clark County)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on State Government and Elections February 9th.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House – Passed
Referred to the House Committee on State Government & Tribal Relations. Had a hearing March 10th, 2021. Did not advance further that session. Reintroduced and had a new hearing in the committee the first day of the 2022 session; amended to take effect immediately and passed out of committee January 13th. Referred to Rules. Passed by the House unanimously January 28th.

In the Senate –

Summary –
State law currently requires purchasing 100% recycled paper for use in copiers and printers, or paper at the highest recycled content that can be used effectively by existing machines. The bill would also allow the purchase of paper that emitted at least 40% less than “standard copy paper”, which is defined as emitting 1,186 kilograms of CO2 per metric ton of paper produced, instead of 100% recycled paper. It would allow the purchase of paper “produced in a process that yields a high reduction in carbon dioxide” in situations where the current law requires the purchase of paper with the highest usable recycled content for machines that can’t use 100% recycled paper effectively.

SB5312 (2022 Session)

SB5312 – Facilitating transit-oriented development through grants to cities and counties paying the costs of preparing environmental analyses that can be used by applicants for development permits.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Mullet (D; 5th District; Issaquah)
Current status – Had a hearing in the House Committee on Environment & Energy February 18th.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the Senate 2021 – Passed
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Housing and Local Government January 27th; passed out of committee February 4th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate 43-2 on February 16th.
In the House 2021 – Did not get a floor vote.
Referred to the House Committee on Environment and Energy. Had a hearing March 11th, amended and passed out of committee March 19th. Referred to Appropriations; had a hearing March 30th; replaced by a striker and passed out of Appropriations March 31st. Referred to Rules April 2nd; never reached the floor for a vote. Returned to Senate Rules, and passed again in 2022.

In the Senate 2022 – Passed
Reintroduced in Senate Rules in the 2022 session and passed January 12th. Returned to the House.
In the House 2022 –

Summary –

In 2021 _
House Appropriations striker –
The striker made several small changes which are summarized at the end of it.
House committee amendment –
This extended the period during which cities that planned to take at least two of the long list of options to increase density in RCW 36.70A.600 could apply for planning grants. (It would now include actions until April 1, 2025 instead of April 2021.)

Original bill –
The Department of Commerce currently awards grants or loans to cities and counties from the Growth Management Planning and Environmental Review Fund. These can be used to assist them in preparing environmental analyses for the state that are integrated with “a comprehensive plan, subarea plan, plan element, countywide planning policy, development regulation, monitoring program, or other planning activity adopted under or implementing” the GMA; and improve the process for project permit review while maintaining environmental quality.

The bill says appropriations to the fund for the purpose of facilitating transit-oriented development may be used for grants to pay the costs associated with a somewhat different list of activities – the preparation of State Environmental Policy Act environmental impact statements, planned action ordinances, subarea plans, costs associated with using other tools under SEPA, and the costs of local code adoption and implementation of such efforts. It specifies these funds may only go to efforts that address environmental impacts and consequences, alternatives, and mitigation measures in sufficient detail to allow the analysis to be adopted in whole or in part by applicants for development permits within the area analyzed.