A bill aimed at allowing more housing near transit centers passed the Washington State Senate on a bipartisan 40-8 vote Wednesday.
Senate Bill 5466, sponsored by 21st District State Sen. Marko Liias, provides development targets near light rail and bus rapid transit stations.
According to a press release from the Washington State Senate Democrats, the Urban Institute predicts that the approach in this legislation will create nearly one million new housing units close to frequent transit services, addressing what he describes as a massive housing shortage in the state.
Liias also said that SB 5466 works in tandem with other legislation to increase housing opportunities across the state, such as efforts to diversify housing supply through changes to current zoning laws.
“As we continue to invest in transportation services across the state, it’s important that more of our neighbors are connected to the routes that will make their commutes easier,” said Liias. “By building more housing near transit centers, we can shorten commute times, decrease carbon emissions, increase housing supply, and create more opportunity for communities statewide.”
The Move Ahead Washington transportation package passed last session invested $3 billion in public transportation – the largest investment in state history. Increasing housing opportunities will further leverage this funding by ensuring more Washingtonians can access public transportation, Liias said.
The bill will now move to the House for consideration.
Sorry this back stabbing son of a … is a perfect example of government with a agenda. Please tell me what jobs are for all these new people?Service? Gosh hate to see the price of your lawn service go up because labor could demand a better wage. Think I just quoted something from someone ” the hypocrisy is as great as the greed.
Lets hope the House sees this differently. Bi-Partisan, right! Do you really consider yourself Bi-Partisan Mr. Liias?
Einstein said:”Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. Marko Liias has a long enough history to predict that he would do something like this yet the voters of this area re-elected him again. Too often voters take the easy way out and vote for the Party rather than taking time to educate themselves about Government and the candidates. We only have ourselves to blame.
You can share your position &/or thoughts on HB 1517 (which is the next evolution of SB 5466 as it moves to the House) at this link.
https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=1517&Chamber=House&Year=2023
My position is that this legislation usurps the decision-making power of local municipalities and therefore does not reflect our system of governance, as it was intended.
The state is over-stepping their bounds!
We elect City Council members to make development & zoning decisions.
Say good bye to single family homes and peaceful backyards. Sad.
We will pay dearly for the votes that re-elected Marko Liias. Housing laws at the state level eliminate the individuality of communities. This Big Brother approach will destroy all small towns as they attempt to deal with high density impacts. The proposed housing laws ignore the current residents and their vision for their communities. Of course we need more housing, but the GMA requirement have been met to-date. So why this big push by the State, who are in affect strangers to our communities, to dictate housing regulations. Leave these decisions to the individual cities.
The Senate voted 40-8. That’s a lot of Republicans crossing the aisle…this is not something Sen. Liias and/or the Democrats rammed through. I understand many in his district are not fans of the senator, but note that even if he were voted out, bills like this would still be passed. The other housing bills are not just squeaking by, but are also getting overwhelming support from both parties, so, again, those who don’t like the results can’t just point at one party.
From the comments posted on this and other posts, it sounds like some folks are contemplating legal challenges to bills that pass…a costly venture if the City were to file suit and unclear if there’s space in the budget to pay attorneys to engage in what would be costly and protracted litigation.
Lynnwood council stated they opposed bills related to state legislation on local residential use (HB1110 specifically) in their 2/27 council meeting. I’ve heard east side municipalities are not happy with these house bills.
There is an opportunity for these cities to get together with a coordinated effort on a legal challenge to spread the financial cost. This is a statewide issue.
I believe Edmonds residents have been more vocal about opposition to these bills… Someone on the Edmonds council could drive a regional coalition to thwart this effort. Patrick Decker on the Lynnwood council was quite outspoken about this.
Ya know with a silk stocking law firm from lets say Bellevue or out of state…might be a real nice class action lawsuit…might not cost much at all. Damages oh I think peace of mind, PTSD, depression and anxiety from being forced out or the feeling one is being ridiculed might all be reasonable damages. Ya never know. I went in today and read a bit about all of this and the US constitution etc.
WA is a big state. It was said we need 160,000. units in WA state. Where we get to live is always a question. And it is usually determined by where you can afford to purchase a home. With people working remotely now they don’t all have to live where there is no room for them. Besides it might be nice for other areas and their economy too.
Kim,
You said “some folks are contemplating legal challenges to bills that pass.” A lawsuit may not be necessary given WA’s own law, RCW 35A.11.050: https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=35A.11.050
RCW 35A.11.050: The general grant of municipal power conferred by this chapter and this title on legislative bodies of noncharter code cities and charter code cities is intended to confer the greatest power of local self-government consistent with the Constitution of this state and shall be construed liberally in favor of such cities.
The Association of Washington Cities (see AWC publication on home rule, link below) could prove to be a valuable tool for cities to challenge the legislature’s override of local authority:
https://wacities.org/docs/default-source/resources/sochomerulereport2021.pdf?sfvrsn=f1b8244f_9
An excerpt from this publication:
“Nationally, calls for uniformity over “a patchwork of regulation” and state and federal preemption of local authority are rising. Often with the support of outside special interests, state governments throughout the country are answering the call by preempting local governments’ decision-making authority, which strips cities of their autonomy to enact policies close to home.“
Is the Building Industry paying off all of these politicians?
…Just askin’
Joan,
The RCW you cite would not automatically override the bill if it were passed and became law. A court would have to adjudicate the issue which would require a lawsuit seeking a ruling on whether that RCW section invalidated the housing legislation. I’m not weighing in on merits of your point, just pointing out the process by which a statute can be found unenforceable/unconstitutional/enacted without authority.
Kim,
RCW 35A.11050 says “is intended to confer the greatest power of local self-government consistent with the Constitution of this state and shall be construed liberally in favor of such cities.” See again:
RCW 35A.11.050: The general grant of municipal power conferred by this chapter and this title on legislative bodies of noncharter code cities and charter code cities is intended to confer the greatest power of local self-government consistent with the Constitution of this state and shall be construed liberally in favor of such cities.
I’m not getting how you see this as “a statute” that can be “found unenforceable/unconstitutional” when it refers to the “Constitution of this state.”
Joan, Sorry for the lack of clarity. It’s very easy for lawyers to get Byzantine. LOL.
Bottom line: If one of the housing bills passes and becomes law, it will be the law of the land unless a court of competent jurisdiction finds that it violates the RCWs you cite, or violates the constitution. And to get to that point, someone will have to file a lawsuit so the court can look at the newly-enacted housing law in the context of the RCWs you cite and in the context of the constitution, and rule accordingly. I’m not making a substantive argument. I’m just talking process.
(Disclaimer that I’m not offering legal advice and that folks should retain their own counsel.)
The following is currently the law of the land:
RCW 35A.63.100 Municipal authority. After approval of the comprehensive plan in accordance with provisions of this chapter, the legislative body, in developing the municipality and in regulating the use of land, may implement or give effect to the comprehensive plan or parts thereof by ordinance or other action to such extent as the legislative body deems necessary or appropriate.
Do state legislators intend to preempt the Comprehensive Plan that they long ago required us to prepare, approve and adopt?
In Edmonds, we are just starting a huge Comprehensive Plan update process. I wonder if State Legislators will later claim City Comprehensive Plans to be a piecemeal approach and try to replace them with a statewide Comprehensive Plan that applies to all cities and ignores the uniqueness of individual cities.
If HB 1110 gets out of the gate, what is next?
Ken,
You ask, “Do state legislators intend to preempt the Comprehensive Plan that they long ago required us to prepare, approve and adopt?”
RCW 35A.63.100 Municipal authority, which you quote above, says “the legislative body” of the “municipality” has the authority to “implement” the comprehensive plan “by ordinance or other action.”
RCW 35A.11.050: https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=35A.11.050
says “is intended to confer the greatest power of local self-government consistent with the Constitution of this state and shall be construed liberally in favor of such cities.”
Given the authority granted by “the Constitution of this state,” it’s clear that Edmonds City Council is under no obligation to integrate SB 5466/HB1110 into our Comprehensive Plan or into our ordinances/city code. In order to force this upon Edmonds and other cities, the legislature would indeed have to “preempt the Comprehensive Plan that they long ago required us to prepare, approve and adopt.”
Thank you, Ken, for bringing this to light.
To Ken Reidy: I hope your astute question concerning the intersection of Comprehensive Plans with the housing bills gets a thoughtful non-ideological answer from our partisan legislators.
Please plan to attend the in-person town hall meeting on Saturday March 18, 2023 10:00am-12:00pm at the Edmonds Waterfront Center. The “hosts” are Strom Peterson, Marko Lillias, Lillian Ortiz-Self, our representatives in Olympia. This is a place that you can let your voice be heard to the people who are suppose to be working in your best interest. Questions have to be submitted ahead of time according to what I am reading in the legislative update.
We did run a story with information about the town hall:https://myedmondsnews.com/2023/03/21st-district-legislators-hosting-telephone-in-person-town-halls-in-march/