Bills: SB6181, SB6154, SB6211, SB6234, SB6242, SB5633, SB6279, SB6291, SB6274, SB6309

Keywords: city incorporation, local governance, municipalities, state law, government structure, culvert replacement, fish passage, hydraulic project approval, Department of Fish and Wildlife, stream crossing, bank stabilization, flood control, erosion control, emergency permit, expedited permit, SEPA, environmental review, local government, county authority, agricultural irrigation

Summary: The Senate Local Government Committee took executive action on several bills before cutoff. Earlier, the chair announced that Senate Bills 6181, 6154, and 6242 would be removed from the executive calendar. Staff then summarized bills including SB 6211 on real estate excise tax procedures for GMA-planning cities and counties; SB 6234 on sewage grinder pumps, with a proposed substitute narrowing the bill to single-family residences, adding public utility districts, clarifying conditions for installation, and assigning maintenance and repair responsibilities; SB 5633 on subdivision of land, with a proposed substitute and a partial fiscal note showing costs to the Department of Commerce; SB 6291 on extending the time a non-certified individual may inspect on-site wastewater systems under supervision; SB 6274 on street standards and frontage improvements, requiring infrastructure barriers be identified in housing analyses and standards be periodically reviewed; and SB 6309 on regional transit authority permitting and land acquisition, with a proposed substitute allowing earlier permit applications and modifying subdivision-law exemptions, along with a partial fiscal note for Commerce. In executive session, the committee adopted the proposed substitutes for SB 6234, SB 5633, and SB 6309, and passed SB 6211, SB 6234, SB 5633, SB 6291, SB 6274, and SB 6309 out of committee. SB 5633 and SB 6309 were referred to the Ways and Means Committee, while the others were sent to the Rules Committee. One member noted concerns about the fiscal note and public input on SB 5633 before the vote, but the substitute and bill still advanced. All final actions were reported as passed subject to signatures.

Transcript Highlights:

• is responsible for all of SEPA and enforcing SEPA.
• Ecology acts as the SEPA rules administrator, adopting and amending the SEPA rules.
• SEPA still applies.
• SEPA still applies.
• In general, SEPA doesn't expire, so you could just do SEPA once.

Summary: The Local Government Committee met in work session and heard a series of presentations on SEPA, permitting reforms, and building code implementation. Department of Ecology staff gave an overview of the State Environmental Policy Act, explaining its role in state and local decision-making, common exemptions, planned actions, and recent housing-related statutory changes such as transit-oriented development exemptions and SEPA appeals protections for certain local ordinances. Committee members asked about repeated SEPA reviews, cultural and historic resource review, and how SEPA relates to NEPA; Ecology responded that repeated reviews usually occur when proposals change and that programmatic EISs can help front-load analysis. Seattle’s Department of Construction and Inspections described how recent SEPA exemptions reduced residential review volume and supported more housing permits, and said the city is considering raising thresholds further. The State Building Code Council provided an update on code adoption timelines and legislative tasks tied to the 2024 codes, including single-stair housing, multiplex housing, dwelling unit size, and temporary emergency shelter standards. Council staff said the content of the codes is largely set, but administrative timelines have been delayed, prompting a motion to postpone final adoption while pursuing ways to preserve the planned implementation schedule. Members asked about the timing of code changes and the impact on housing costs, and staff said the legislative topics remain on track for inclusion in the 2024 code package. Committee staff then reviewed recent permitting legislation, including SB 5290’s permit decision deadlines and fee-refund provisions, later bills limiting pre-application meetings and clarifying that building permits are excluded from those timelines, and project-specific changes affecting middle housing, ADUs, lot splits, passive house projects, self-certification, transit-oriented development, and parking requirements. Commerce’s Dave Anderson reported on SB 5290 implementation, including guidance on permit fees, studies on staffing and statewide permitting systems, grants to local governments, and the first annual performance report, which showed mixed results and highlighted the importance of digital tools, clear checklists, staff training, and coordination across departments. Local officials from Issaquah and Kitsap County described their own process improvements, including code updates, optional pre-application meetings, new staffing, reporting systems, and a phased “Two by Six” review model in Kitsap, while also noting challenges from staffing shortages, agency coordination, and the burden of implementing multiple new mandates.

Transcript Highlights:

• The SEPA rule directs us to focus on potential significant action.
• The SEPA rule directs us to focus on potential significant adverse environmental impacts.
• Part of that is the necessity of having SEPA as an assessment tool.
• And, you know, part of that is built into SEPA.
• You know, the SEPA lead agency is the one making decisions. That is the local entity.

Summary: The committee held a work session on state environmental policy act (SEPA) implementation and carryout bags. Ecology staff Diane Buterak described the Clean Energy Programmatic Environmental Impact Statements (PEISs) completed for utility-scale solar, onshore wind, and green hydrogen, plus a new PEIS underway for sustainable aviation fuel. She explained that PEISs provide broad planning-level analysis to help developers and agencies avoid or mitigate impacts, but do not replace project-level review. Members asked about permitting timelines, greenhouse gas emissions from different hydrogen production methods, water use, agricultural land conversion, battery fire risk, and tribal consultation. Buterak said the PEISs identify potentially significant impacts and mitigation measures, including fire response planning, early tribal outreach, and agrovoltaics as an option for solar projects. EFSEC’s Amy Hofkimer then presented the transmission-facility programmatic EIS required by SB 5165 for 230 kV and higher transmission projects. She said the statewide review covers new lines and certain upgrades/modifications, analyzes impacts to water, cultural and tribal resources, habitat, and other areas, and uses general measures, design considerations, avoidance criteria, and sensitivity maps to guide siting and corridor planning. She said the final document would be issued in early October. Questions focused on reconductoring, tribal lands, scenic areas, and whether the review could affect existing lines crossing tribal lands. A Grant County planning director, Jim Anderson Cook, said Ecology’s PEIS would help with cumulative impacts for clustered solar projects, but noted tight local review timelines and the need for strong pre-application coordination, especially on cultural resource studies and decommissioning plans. Yakama Nation attorney Shona Leverett argued SEPA is only an assessment tool and said tribes face barriers from short comment periods, limited confidential tribal input, weak cumulative impact analysis, and challenges in the FSEC process; she urged better upfront developer diligence and more effective tribal coordination. Puget Sound Energy’s Sarah Leverett said the utility needs efficient and predictable permitting to meet clean energy mandates while maintaining reliable service and aging infrastructure. She described the scale of needed clean energy and transmission buildout, including a 10-year process for the Energize Eastside transmission rebuild, and said more consistent SEPA and PEIS processes could help. Members asked about future generation sources, reliability, and hydropower as a firming resource; she said PSE is pursuing an “all of the above” approach and would welcome more firm, dispatchable clean energy options. The committee then shifted to carryout bags. Staff Jacob Lipson and Tracy Taylor reviewed Washington’s bag law, its preemption of local ordinances, the current 8-cent charge, the scheduled increase to 12 cents, and the 2025 change delaying the 4-mil thickness requirement until 2028 while adding a temporary 4-cent penalty for thicker bags. Ecology’s Peter Lyon said the agency emphasizes education and complaint-based enforcement, has received 872 reports, and has not yet imposed any fines. Commerce’s Kirk Esmond summarized a WSU study finding fewer plastic bags distributed but more plastic by weight, and said Commerce and Ecology support keeping the 2.25-mil standard and not allowing thinner single-use bags again. Retail industry testimony from Brandon Housekeeper said grocers comply with the law but oppose the added 4-cent penalty and thicker-bag requirement, citing higher costs and confusion in the policy changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we did hear Representative Schulte's bill, House Bill 3105, regarding SEPA.
• I know you were before our committee last year with a SEPA bill.
• Besides leaving that out, the scope of this SEPA is almost the exact same as the original SEPA.
• Did you modify this from your second SEPA? Yes. Okay.
• So I cut my 2A advocacy teeth on SEPA.

Summary: The committee first met in executive session and approved HB 2468 and HB 2481. HB 2481 was amended to replace earlier federal-style language with the governor’s recommended definitions and executive-order language, then rolled into a committee substitute and passed out of committee on a 9-3 vote. The discussion on HB 2481 centered on SNAP-related definitions and whether the revised language would affect federal waivers or change food-stamp purchasing rules; the sponsor said it would not. The committee then moved to regular session. The main public hearing was on HB 3070, the Second Amendment Preservation Act. Representative Hardwick said the bill was revised to remove language the Eighth Circuit had found problematic, while keeping Missouri’s anti-commandeering approach and prohibitions on state or local participation in certain federal gun-control actions, such as firearm registries, tracking, and confiscation from law-abiding citizens. Members questioned whether the bill would interfere with task forces, federal cooperation, courthouses, FFL paperwork, or local officers sharing information with federal agents. Hardwick and supporters said it would not affect Missouri enforcement of state gun laws or cooperation on other crimes, and that the bill was intended to stop Missouri officers from being used to enforce specific federal gun-control measures. Supporters from the Missouri Firearms Coalition and a gun-rights advocate backed the bill and emphasized civil penalties and anti-commandeering protections, while an opponent from Moms Demand Action argued it would handcuff police, weaken interstate trafficking enforcement, and create a dangerous patchwork of enforcement. No vote was taken on HB 3070 in the hearing. The committee also heard HB 388, which would prohibit certain anti-competitive health-care contracting practices, including anti-steering, anti-tiering, gag clauses, and most-favored-nation clauses. The sponsor and supporting witnesses described the bill as an anti-consolidation measure intended to improve price transparency, preserve competition, and help consumers and insurers steer patients toward lower-cost providers. They said the bill would apply to both providers and insurers and would not be anti-hospital or anti-payer. Members asked about effects on rural access to care, 340B pricing, physician-owned referral arrangements, and whether the bill would actually lower consumer costs. Supporters said the goal was to give payers more negotiating leverage and ultimately benefit patients through more competitive pricing, but no action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next bill on your list: Senate Bill 5609 concerning cultural resource protection under SEPA.
• bill and, within the categorical exemption for the Growth Management Act planning activities under SEPA
• bill, and within the categorical exemption for the Growth Management Act planning activities under SEPA
• It directs counties, of using the categorical exemption under SEPA.
• It extends the effective date of the local ordinance requirement under the GMA/SEPA exemption to 2032

Bills: SB6124, SB6171, SB6284, SB5609, SB6172, SB6246, SB5932, SB6269, SB6223, SB5975

Keywords: appliance affordability, cost index, energy efficiency, consumer protection, Washington state, energy facilities, large energy consumers, regulation, environment, sustainability, artificial intelligence, data privacy, technological impacts, cultural resources, land use, environmental policy, exemptions, state laws, Washington climate policy, greenhouse gas

Summary: The Senate Environment, Energy, and Technology Committee took executive action on 11 bills, with staff briefing each measure and members considering multiple proposed substitutes and amendments. The committee advanced bills on an Appliance Affordability Index study (SB 624), emerging large energy use facilities/data centers (SB 6171), AI systems (SB 6284), cultural resource protection under SEPA (SB 5609), coal plant treatment under cap-and-invest and tax law (SB 6172), emissions-intensive trade-exposed facilities (SB 6246), low-to-zero-carbon alternative jet fuel production (SB 5932), motor fuel definitions (SB 6269), community-scaled weatherization projects (SB 6223), lead in cookware (SB 5975), and electric transmission system modernization (SB 5466). Several bills were described as technical or policy updates tied to climate, energy reliability, consumer protection, and land-use review. Members debated a number of substantive changes. On SB 6171, the committee rejected an amendment to remove the proposed fee on data centers and instead advanced a substitute that retained tariff, reporting, and utility-related provisions; testimony emphasized both competitiveness for data centers and ratepayer protection. On SB 6284, the committee advanced a substitute that refined definitions, added human-consideration language, extended risk-management duties to developers with exemptions for smaller entities and certain sectors, and clarified enforcement. On SB 5609, an amendment to delay or restructure cultural-resource requirements was not adopted, and the committee moved forward a substitute requiring local ordinances and a governor-led task force; supporters stressed protecting irreplaceable cultural resources, while opponents raised housing and implementation concerns. The committee also adopted an amendment to SB 6172 related to emergency DOE orders for a coal facility, then advanced the bill; it moved SB 6246 forward without amendment; and it adopted a substitute for SB 5932 intended to preserve tax incentive certainty for alternative jet fuel producers over a 10-year period. For SB 5975, the committee rejected one substitute and adopted another that tightened lead restrictions in cookware and shifted future regulation to the Safer Products Program. On SB 5466, the committee rejected several amendments on wildfire risk, corridor planning, landowner consultation, eminent domain, and liability, then advanced the proposed second substitute to Ways and Means. Most bills were reported out of committee with due pass recommendations, several to Ways and Means and others to Rules, and the meeting adjourned after all executive actions were completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• So are there also state environmental regulations that have to be followed on top of NEPA, like SEPA?
• And those of us who have served in or are serving in local government are very familiar with the SEPA
• This year, I heard that in other committees we are considering SEPA processes and so on because of not
• So is there some way for us to coordinate with the folks working on both NEPA and SEPA processes or,
• So is there some way for us to coordinate with the folks working on both NEPA and SEPA processes or,

Summary: The committee first heard an update from the Department of Commerce’s new state broadband director on Washington’s BEAD broadband program and permitting process. Jordan Arnold said Washington’s final BEAD proposal has been submitted to NTIA but remains unapproved after months of back-and-forth over federal rule changes, technology choices, cost, and tribal sovereignty. He said the program is expected to bring about $1 billion in broadband investment, connecting roughly 166,000 homes and small businesses, with a mix of fiber, fixed wireless, and low-earth-orbit satellite. He also outlined permitting challenges, including rights-of-way and environmental/historic reviews, and said the office is working on permitting roundtables, federal coordination, and NEPA expertise to speed reviews. Members asked about the interaction of NEPA and SEPA, the reduction in deployable federal BEAD dollars, the long-term value of fiber versus other technologies, and possible coordination with other infrastructure permitting efforts. The committee then took executive action on House Bill 2684, which would add Middle Eastern and North African groups to the Office of Minority and Women’s Business Enterprises’ socially disadvantaged certification framework. Four proposed amendments were considered and all failed: an amendment narrowing the rebuttable presumption to groups with specific current discrimination, an amendment requiring disaggregated subgroup data and limiting use of aggregated data, an amendment tying the rules to the state constitution, and two amendments requiring consistency with federal law and Attorney General review. After debate over whether the bill was too broad or needed more specificity, the committee voted 7-4 to report HB 2684 out with a do pass recommendation. Finally, the committee unanimously approved House Joint Memorial 4012, which urges Congress to address the 20-year rule affecting certain combat-injured veterans and seeks parity in recognition and benefits. The memorial was reported out with a do pass recommendation by an 11-0 vote, with two members excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 5609 concerns cultural resource protection under SEPA.
• bill, and within the categorical exemption for the Growth Management Act planning activities under SEPA
• It directs counties, of using the categorical exemption under SEPA.
• It extends the effective date of the local ordinance requirement under the GMA/SEPA exemption to 2032
• It extends the effective date of the local ordinance requirement under the GMA/SEPA exemption to 2032

Summary: The Senate Environment, Energy, and Technology Committee took executive action on 11 bills. It advanced SB 624 on an Appliance Affordability Index study with an amendment excluding consumer electronics, and SB 6284 on artificial intelligence systems with a proposed substitute adding definitions, developer requirements, exemptions for some entities, and clarifying enforcement. The committee also moved forward SB 5609 on cultural resource protection under SEPA after rejecting an amendment to the proposed substitute, and SB 6172 on coal plant treatment under cap-and-invest after adopting an amendment related to emergency federal orders. Several energy and climate bills were also approved, including SB 6246 on emissions-intensive trade-exposed facilities, SB 5932 on alternative jet fuel production, SB 6269 on the definition of motor fuel, and SB 6223 on community-scaled weatherization projects. On SB 5975 concerning lead in cookware, the committee rejected one proposed substitute and adopted another that bans intentionally added lead in cookware beginning in 2027 and directs future regulation through the Safer Products program. The committee then considered SB 5466 on electric transmission reliability and capacity, taking up multiple amendments to a proposed second substitute. Amendments addressing wildfire risk, corridor identification, landowner consultation, eminent domain, and wildfire liability were all rejected, and the bill was advanced on a due pass recommendation. In each case, the committee’s final action was to pass the bills or substitutes subject to signatures, with several measures referred onward to Ways and Means or Rules as noted.

Transcript Highlights:

• Annexations are exempt from SEPA review.
• Finally, I think there’s an important point with the SEPA and GMA integration.
• You know, SEPA was adopted almost 20 years before the GMA was adopted.
• And the legislature has done so in part by raising the SEPA thresholds, SEPA exemption thresholds.
• So again, I thank you for... ...legislature’s efforts in integrating SEPA with GMA.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chapter 571, which is all Missouri's weapons offenses, that's not a violation of SEPA either.
• I know you were before our committee last year with a SEPA bill.
• is almost the exact same as the original SEPA.
• It's ancillary, not a violation of SEPA. Now, let's say they say there's a task force.
• . and I prefer not included because that's not SEPA.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that would have to go through, I would think, have to go through the SEPA process.
• because it has extensive public involvement requirements and all cleanups are subject to SEPA review
• because it has extensive public involvement requirements and all cleanups are subject to SEPA review
• we looked at the actual requirements and the laws, and I just want to speak to the question about SEPA
• parties could be a local government in terms of being the ones either owning the property or having SEPA

Summary: The I-900 Subcommittee held a public hearing on the State Auditor’s performance audit, Community Engagement During Contaminated Site Cleanups. Auditors said Ecology directly conducts or supervises cleanup at only about 8% of active contaminated sites, while most sites are handled by third parties or have no cleanup plan yet. The audit found that Ecology generally met legal requirements at the sites it oversees, but community engagement varied, was not consistently tailored to local needs, and lacked a systematic “lessons learned” process. Auditors also found inconsistent coordination between Ecology and the Department of Health, and limited guidance for staff on when to collaborate. Tribal feedback was mixed: some tribes said engagement met their needs, while others wanted earlier and more tailored outreach. Committee members pressed the auditors on why many third-party-managed sites appeared to have little or no public involvement, and whether Ecology has broader authority to require public engagement and oversight. The auditors responded that their review focused on community engagement requirements, not the full cleanup permitting process, and said the gap they identified was the lack of required oversight for third-party engagement. Members also asked about tribal engagement, exposure scenarios, and the meaning of “active” and “planless” sites. Ecology officials said they agreed with many of the findings, were already taking steps to improve community research, lessons-learned reviews, tribal guidance, and coordination with Health, and had recently launched a public email notification system for site status changes. They also said some recommendations would require additional funding or staff resources. Public testimony supported stronger community engagement and more resources for Ecology. Washington Conservation Action said contaminated sites disproportionately affect communities of color and low-income communities, praised the audit for highlighting the need for better site-specific engagement, and urged full funding for MTCA-related work. The hearing ended with the chair inviting written comments and adjourning the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Annexations are exempt from SEPA review.
• Finally, I think there’s an important point with the SEPA and GMA integration.
• You know, SEPA was adopted almost 20 years before the GMA was adopted.
• And the legislature has done so in part by raising the SEPA thresholds, SEPA exemption thresholds.
• with how SEPA should, in the context of a subdivision, think of these same questions.

Summary: The committee held a work session on local government issues, beginning with an update from the State Building Code Council on four legislatively mandated code amendments now in CR-102 rulemaking: temporary emergency shelters, reduced minimum dwelling unit size, multiplex housing up to three stories and six units, and single-exit apartment buildings up to six stories. Council staff also described a separate embodied-carbon appendix proposal that remains under public review, with testimony both supporting and opposing it. Members asked about the rationale for some of the code limits, including the restriction on connecting multiplex buildings. The committee then heard a panel on annexations from MRSC, Pierce County, and the Association of Washington Cities. Witnesses reviewed annexation methods, including petition, election, and interlocal agreement approaches, and said larger annexations are increasingly using interlocal agreements because they can address infrastructure, revenue sharing, and public process concerns. They described barriers such as inconsistent local standards, the cost of infrastructure, referendum risk, census requirements, and the difficulty of persuading residents and local officials to support annexation. Members asked about the five-year restriction on residential zoning changes in one annexation method and whether a hearing examiner could reduce political pressure on local decision-makers. A second panel discussed subdivision reform. The Master Builders Association urged raising the short-plat threshold within urban growth areas to 30 lots as a simpler first step, citing permitting delays and added housing costs. The City of Spokane described implementation problems with recent housing laws, including uncertainty about how to review plats under HB 1110, lot-splitting administration, and added notice requirements for unit lot subdivisions. AWC said there was broad agreement that subdivision decisions should be more administrative, but public hearings remained a point of disagreement. The committee also heard from FutureWise, the Washington State Association of Counties, and Lewis County on county development regulation and enforcement, with witnesses emphasizing underfunded code enforcement, inconsistent standards between counties and cities, and the need for better coordination, incentives, and possibly stronger enforcement tools. No votes were taken; the chair said the committee would continue working on possible solutions in future sessions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So are there also state environmental regulations that have to be followed on top of NEPA, like SEPA?
• Representative Penner said Representative Paul had largely asked his question about NEPA and SEPA, and
• They then said that on page 10, and in relation to the earlier questions about SEPA and NEPA, they had
• heard in other committees that SEPA processes are being considered because of not just BEAD funding
• So is there some way for us to coordinate with the folks working on both NEPA and SEPA processes or,

Bills: HB2684, HJM4012

Keywords: social disadvantage, business certification, state guidelines, economic equity, minority-owned businesses, combat veterans, support, military service, injury compensation, veteran affairs, 904, all

Summary: The committee first heard an update from the Department of Commerce’s new state broadband director on Washington’s BEAD broadband program and permitting plans. He said Washington’s final BEAD proposal, submitted to NTIA in September and resubmitted in January after roughly 25 rounds of federal revisions, is still awaiting approval. He explained that the federal program now prioritizes lower-cost technologies more than fiber, and that Washington’s preliminary awards would connect about 166,000 homes and small businesses with roughly 35% fiber, 38% fixed wireless, and 27% low-earth-orbit satellite. He also described the state’s permitting strategy, including a goal of issuing broadband permits within 90 days, use of permitting roundtables, and hiring NEPA expertise to speed environmental and historic review while coordinating with state, local, federal, and tribal partners. Members asked about the relationship between NEPA and SEPA, how the federal funding total changed from earlier expectations, the long-term costs and durability of fiber versus fixed wireless and satellite, and whether broadband permitting lessons could inform other infrastructure work such as transmission. The witness said NEPA can function as an umbrella for other environmental reviews, that the federal allocation has not been rescinded but only a portion is currently available for deployment, and that fiber is the most durable long-term investment even though it is more expensive up front. Members also discussed how density affects the feasibility of fiber deployment, with the witness noting that remote areas become exponentially more expensive to serve. The committee then considered House Bill 2684, which would add Middle Eastern and North African groups to the Office of Minority and Women’s Business Enterprises’ socially disadvantaged certification framework. Five proposed amendments were debated, but none were adopted. The amendments would have narrowed the rebuttable presumption by requiring findings of current discrimination, required disaggregated subgroup data analysis, tied the rules to the state constitution, and required consistency with federal law and Attorney General review. After debate, the bill passed the committee on a 7-4 vote with two excused, and was reported out with a do pass recommendation. Finally, the committee unanimously approved House Joint Memorial 4012, which urges Congress to address the 20-year rule affecting certain combat-injured veterans and create parity in recognition and benefits. The memorial was reported out with a do pass recommendation on an 11-0 vote, with two members excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• . cultural resource review and environmental and all those projects follow SEPA.
• Tribes use the SEPA process to identify necessary mitigation measures that uphold.
• Tribes use the SEPA process to identify necessary mitigation measures that uphold treaty rights.
• Before you is Substitute Senate Bill 5609 pertaining to cultural resource protection under SEPA.
• That project, which is not exempt from SEPA and is subject to SEPA right now, has been waiting for over

Bills: SB6346, SB6347, SB6147, SB6246, SB5940, SB5882, SB6223, SJR8206, SB5762, SB5828

Keywords: millionaires tax, wealth tax, income tax, state revenue, tax reform, Washington estate tax, estate tax, inheritance tax, death tax, probate, decedent, gross estate, taxable estate, exclusion amount, tax rate, estate planning, heirs, beneficiaries, RCW 83.100, Department of Revenue

Summary: The committee first suspended the five-day notice rule for all bills on the agenda by a 15-9 roll call vote, after several senators objected that the main tax bill had not been public long enough and that the fiscal note had just been released. The hearing then focused on Senate Bill 6346, described by staff as a 9.9% tax on Washington taxable income above a $1 million household deduction, with additional charitable deductions, credits for certain taxes, and related changes to the working families tax credit, a grooming and hygiene sales tax exemption, a larger small business B&O credit, and early repeal of the high-grossing business B&O surcharge. Staff said the proposal would raise about $3.5 billion annually once fully implemented, with most revenue going to the general fund and 5% to a public defense stabilization account for counties. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including labor, anti-poverty, health care, education, and local government advocates, argued the bill would make the tax code more progressive, help fund schools, health care, child care, public defense, and other services, and provide relief through the working families tax credit and lower taxes on working people. Several individuals who would be subject to the tax also testified in support, saying they were willing to pay more to support public services and community investment. Opponents, including business groups, builders, hospitality, rental housing, medical, and taxpayer advocates, warned the bill would function as a tax on pass-through businesses and retained earnings, hurt housing production and small businesses, create cash-flow problems, and potentially drive people and investment out of Washington. Committee members asked questions about the bill’s treatment of pass-through entities, student athletes, nonresidents, capital gains, and whether the measure would eventually expand beyond high earners. Some witnesses and senators also raised constitutional concerns and argued the bill conflicts with Initiative 2111 and the state constitution’s tax provisions. Others noted the bill’s public defense funding and asked for broader or different distribution formulas, including possible support for cities and higher education. No final action on Senate Bill 6346 was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the committee was still hearing testimony when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• projects follow SEPA.
• Tribes use the SEPA process to identify necessary mitigation measures that uphold...
• . cultural resource review and environmental and all those projects follow SEPA.
• Tribes use the SEPA process to identify necessary mitigation measures that uphold.
• That project, which is not exempt from SEPA and is subject to SEPA right now, has been waiting for over

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met on February 6, 2026, and first voted to suspend the five-day notice rule for all bills on the agenda. Senators Braun and Gildon objected, arguing the bill needed more public review and that the fiscal note had only just been released, but a roll call vote passed 15-9 and the committee proceeded to Senate Bill 6346. Staff briefed SB 6346 as a proposal to create a 9.9% income tax on Washington taxable income above a $1 million per-household standard deduction, with a $50,000 charitable deduction, apportionment rules for nonresidents and certain professions, quarterly estimated payments, and credits for capital gains tax and certain business taxes. Staff said the tax would begin in 2029 and eventually raise about $3.5 billion annually from roughly 30,000 taxpayers. The bill also would expand the Working Families Tax Credit, create a sales tax exemption for grooming and hygiene products, increase the small business B&O tax credit and filing threshold, and end the B&O surcharge on high-grossing businesses one year early. Members questioned the bill’s constitutionality, its exemption from referendum, treatment of student athletes, natural-resource industries, and whether real estate gains would be captured. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including labor groups, educators, health care advocates, counties, child care workers, and some business owners and high-income individuals, said the bill would make the tax code more progressive and provide stable funding for health care, education, child care, public defense, and other services, while expanding the Working Families Tax Credit. Opponents, including many small business, construction, housing, and taxpayer advocates, argued the measure would function as a tax on pass-through businesses and retained earnings, harm housing production and investment, encourage wealthy residents and businesses to leave the state, and violate the state constitution or the will of voters. No final action on SB 6346 was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Under SEPA, new proposals are generally reviewed by a designated lead agency.
• Under SEPA, new proposals are generally reviewed by a designated lead agency.
• A responsible official represents the lead agency to ensure that the environmental analysis meets SEPA
• project permit applications related to a residential project and must be the responsible official under SEPA
• building construction is under way or there is a current environmental review process occurring under SEPA

Summary: The Senate Local Government Committee waived the five-day notice rule and then took up two House bills. HB 2418 would tighten and expand permit-review timelines for residential projects, including requiring “procedural completeness” determinations, adding excluded time periods, extending timeline and refund requirements to certain fee-charging state and local entities, creating review deadlines for special purpose districts and public utility districts, and requiring local governments to designate a permit responsible official and a single point of contact. The sponsor said the bill was intended to improve predictability and reduce delays in permitting; builders and housing advocates strongly supported it, while sewer and water districts and county representatives raised concerns about incomplete referrals, staffing shortages, business-day versus calendar-day deadlines, and the cost of implementing the new contact requirements. The committee heard testimony but took no final vote on the bill in the transcript. HB 2451 would revise Washington’s local tax increment financing program. Staff explained that the bill adds guardrails and transparency, changes notice and hearing requirements, adjusts the assessed-value cap for increment areas, adds public safety facilities to eligible improvements, requires more detailed project analyses and annual reporting, and creates a negotiation/mediation/arbitration process for impacts to taxing districts. The sponsor said the measure was a carefully negotiated compromise intended to address junior taxing district concerns without creating an opt-out. Supporters from the Port of Tacoma, fire chiefs, cities, and counties said the bill improves the earlier TIF framework by strengthening the but-for test, notice, and participation rules, while counties still expressed concern about cumulative impacts and asked for future opt-out discussions. No final committee action was taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't quite understand why this is exempt from SEPA.
• There's lots of other suggestions I would make to be exempt from SEPA as well.
• I don't quite understand why this is exempt from SEPA.
• There's lots of other suggestions I would make to be exempt from SEPA as well.
• I don't quite understand why this is exempt from SEPA.

Bills: SB6147, SB6082, SB5862, SB5882, SB6323, SB6346, SB6162, SB6256, SB6220, SB5650, SB6343, SB6113, SB6211, SB6114, SB5898, SB6347, SB6244, SB5868, SB5762, SB5988, SB6194, SB6246, SB6223, SB6052, SB5828, SB5954, SB5963, SB5909, SGA9306

Keywords: grocery establishments, closure notice, consumer rights, local businesses, student financial aid, financial aid fraud, higher education, college enrollment fraud, fictitious students, ghost students, enrollment fraud, aid integrity, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, AI fraud, fraud prevention, Washington State, legislative audit, JLARC, full-time equivalent

Transcript Highlights:

• Under SEPA, new proposals are generally reviewed by a designated lead agency.
• A responsible official represents the lead agency to ensure that the environmental analysis meets SEPA
• project permit applications related to a residential project and must be the responsible official under SEPA
• building construction is underway or there's a current environmental review process occurring under SEPA

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• types of concerns, and we believe that providing the cities and counties that do the majority of the SEPA
• SEPA covers a huge variety of projects and developments in our state, and we want to be careful about
• So that's a part of the SEPA process—identifying all of those potential things that might need to be

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee I-900 Subcommittee heard JLARC’s annual update on the status of legislative implementation of State Auditor recommendations, followed by two State Auditor performance audits. JLARC staff reported that for the 2024 review period there were three new legislative recommendations and three unresolved older recommendations. They said the legislature did not convene a work group on civil asset forfeiture, and no formal action was taken on two water-use-efficiency recommendations. Two recommendations related to concurrent Medicaid enrollments were addressed in a bill introduced this session, but that bill was not adopted. The first audit examined how Washington can ensure climate-resilient electricity infrastructure. The State Auditor found the state has opportunities to better adapt new energy infrastructure by using more site-specific climate information, broader collaboration, and vulnerability assessments. The report recommended expanding climate analyses through the University of Washington Climate Impacts Group if funding is available, using forecasted information in DNR wildfire maps, designating a non-regulatory office to coordinate siting and conflict resolution, and expanding vulnerability assessments in Ecology and Commerce processes. Agency witnesses generally agreed resilience is important but emphasized existing efforts, the need to avoid duplicative requirements, the importance of affordability and efficiency, and the role of current forums such as the Clean Energy Siting Council and SEPA processes. The second audit reviewed fines for human trafficking and related sexual exploitation crimes. Auditors found courts assessed fines inconsistently, collection rates varied, some revenues were sent to the wrong local government, and some jurisdictions did not use the money as required for enforcement, prevention, or survivor services. The audit recommended courts work with prosecutors to improve awareness of mandatory fines, and that King and Pierce County improve coding, templates, and tracking so revenues are routed and used correctly. King County testified that it appreciated the audit and described its existing prevention and survivor-support work. The committee took no votes or formal actions and adjourned after the presentations and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don’t quite understand why this is exempt from SEPA.
• There are lots of other suggestions I would make to be exempt from SEPA as well.
• I don't quite understand why this is exempt from SEPA.
• There's lots of other suggestions I would make to be exempt from SEPA as well.
• if the tribes don't want to go through it they don't have to and they will go through the regular SEPA

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met in executive session on February 9, 2026, first hearing a staff briefing on Senate Bill 6346, which would impose a tax on individuals earning over $1 million. Staff described the bill’s revenue and spending impacts and reviewed a proposed substitute and 11 amendments addressing items such as public defense funding, charitable deductions, out-of-state tax credits, small business credits, diapers, constitutional issues, and a contingent constitutional amendment. The committee later took up the bill and rejected all of the offered amendments, then advanced the substitute bill with a due pass recommendation to the Rules Committee. Members supporting the bill argued it would help address tax fairness and fund public services, while opponents raised concerns about constitutionality, economic harm, and the effect on businesses and charitable giving. The committee also acted on a series of policy bills. It advanced a substitute bill on grocery store closures in food deserts after adopting a narrower substitute, despite concerns from some members about burdening grocers. It approved a substitute bill expanding voting access for military, overseas, Native American, and disabled voters, adopting a second substitute that removed a cybersecurity review requirement. The committee also advanced bills on tort claim arbitration against governments, victim and witness protections in sexual assault and domestic violence cases, JLARC review of student aid fraud, agricultural collective bargaining, labor relations if federal preemption ends, a cost-of-living adjustment for Plan 1 retirees, workers’ compensation and medical care access, line-of-duty death reimbursements, law enforcement background checks and eligibility, veterans’ discharge definitions, and extraordinary medical placement. Several of these bills had amendments adopted, including changes to tort claim oversight, victim-requested standby counsel, agricultural labor definitions, workers’ compensation penalties, law enforcement volunteer support, and extraordinary medical placement criteria. In the second group of bills, staff briefed measures affecting property taxes, housing, cannabis, disaster-related tax relief, technical tax code changes, aircraft fuel tax revenues, the estate tax, and a pesticide tax exemption. The committee heard that a substitute for the fire protection district bill would alter how city or town levy capacity is reduced and include consultation requirements and board-creation provisions. It also heard that the property tax relief expansion for seniors and disabled retirees needed a substitute to make the consolidated school levy revenue-neutral. Other bills would expand tax exemptions for low-income housing and nonprofit homeownership, authorize local cannabis excise taxes, extend disaster repair tax relief, expand housing-related local sales tax uses, make technical tax code changes, redirect aircraft fuel tax revenues to aeronautics, reduce the estate tax rate, and extend a pesticide tax exemption. The transcript ends during the committee’s consideration of Senate Bill 6346, with the committee debating and rejecting amendments before moving the bill forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first time I ever spoke was at a House hearing in support of SEPA back in 2020.
• The original SEPA provided a deterrent to keep state and local officers from enforcing federal laws,
• SEPA wasn't a money grab. It was to serve as a bulwark against federal overreach.
• I would hand him the old SEPA and say pull out the language that the Eighth Circuit wrongly, I feel,

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first went into executive session, where House Bills 3012, 2997, and 3058 were combined into a House committee substitute and then voted do pass by a 17-0 roll call. House Bill 2868 was set aside for further work on a substitute. The committee then moved into public hearings, beginning with House Bill 1740, “Melanie’s Law,” which would increase penalties for intoxicated driving cases involving injury or death and expand ignition interlock requirements, including for high-BAC offenders. The sponsor and family members of victims described the bill as a response to fatal crashes involving loved ones, while law enforcement, MoDOT, prosecutors, and MADD supported the measure as a prevention tool and cited data on recidivism and fatal crashes. Members asked about BAC thresholds, whether the bill would cover drug impairment, fiscal impacts, and the relationship to existing sentencing and parole rules. No vote was taken on HB 1740 during the hearing. The committee also heard House Bills 3049 and 368, described by the sponsors as technical cleanup bills to resolve conflicts in Missouri’s sex offender registry statutes after court rulings and to reorganize and clarify the law. A prosecutor testified in support, and members discussed registry tiers, age-of-consent issues, and how the changes might affect people whose offenses were tied to older laws or unusual fact patterns. The bills were presented as consistency and cleanup measures, and no opposition testimony was offered. Next, House Bill 2311 was heard, proposing to raise the age of consent to 18 and reduce the close-in-age exception from four years to three. The sponsor said the change was intended to align the law with recent marriage-age changes and avoid mixed signals. Members raised concerns about criminalizing high-school relationships and about consistency with existing law, but there was no testimony in opposition or a vote. Finally, House Bill 3105, a revised Second Amendment Preservation Act-style bill, was heard. The sponsor said it would remove unconstitutional language from the prior law, bar state and local officials from knowingly violating law-abiding citizens’ firearm rights, and preserve cooperation with federal law enforcement. Supporters, including sheriffs, argued it protects constitutional rights while allowing officers to act against dangerous criminals and people in crisis. Opponents, including gun-rights advocates, argued the bill still lacked a meaningful deterrent to federal overreach and raised concerns about vague language such as “danger to self or others,” which they said could function like a red-flag law and be misused. The hearing ended without a vote on HB 3105.