Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legislation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Building Code Council committee reviews changes to kit-home bill; several related bills now dead for the session
Summary
At its April 3 legislative committee meeting, staff presented an updated bill-tracking sheet showing key changes to Senate Bill 5552 (kit homes), and reported that agritourism and elevator bills are now dead for the session. Members discussed rulemaking timing and local adoption pathways for potential code amendments.
Dustin, a staff member for the State Building Code Council legislative committee, presented an updated bill-tracking sheet at the committee's April 3 meeting and highlighted changes to several bills that affect the council.
Dustin said the tracking sheet on his screen showed “all the alive bills that we've looked at here this session” on the left and “all the bills that we've looked at that are now dead” on the right. He flagged Senate Bill 5552, the kit-homes bill, for particular attention and noted amendments made in the House that alter the bill's definition and the timing for related rulemaking.
The most substantive change to SB 5552 that the committee discussed is an added sentence narrowing the definition of “kit homes” by excluding “pallet shelters or other prefabricated shelters designed to be used as temporary emergency shelters.” Dustin described that exclusion as “nice to have” and said the sponsor accepted the change after staff input. He also said the bill's deadline for rulemaking was moved from December 30, 2025, to November 1, 2026, a change the committee was told would allow inclusion in the 2024 code cycle and permit an off-cycle rulemaking process that eases pressure on the regular 2024 schedule.
Todd Baber, a committee member, described the change as “good” and noted it was notable that the amendment singled out Pallet Shelter by name; he said industry has asked whether proposals could be submitted under the International Residential Code (IRC) amendment window, which the committee expects to open in about two weeks. “We wouldn't be opposed to that,” Baber said, adding that an IRC amendment could also be proposed in the normal code cycle.
Dustin told members he had offered amendments to the bill sponsors and that those offers had produced “some good changes.” He advised the committee to “stay tuned” for further movement but reported no immediate hearings the council needed to prepare testimony for that week.
The committee also learned that two other bills it had tracked are effectively dead for the session: the agritourism bill, Senate Bill 5055, and an elevator bill, Senate Bill 5156. Dustin said both are expected to return in the next (short) session rather than this year. He noted that language relating to elevators previously placed in a development bill (SB 1183) had been removed and that the elevator provisions remained only in SB 5156, which is now dead and therefore “no longer impactful to SBCC.”
Members briefly discussed an upcoming BRFW meeting where the council will consider taking action on previously tabled items and a planned hearing on an embodied-carbon amendment; one member said he had begun reaching out to jurisdictions such as the City of Spokane and Spokane Valley to gather local feedback in anticipation of local-adoption options if the embodied-carbon language moves forward as an IBC amendment.
No formal motions or changes to council policy were made on these legislative items at this meeting. Staff committed to circulate updated tracking materials and to continue outreach to jurisdictions and industry stakeholders as hearings and amendment windows approach.
Less immediate matters discussed in the legislative update included member questions about whether sponsor feedback had been influenced by council comments on agritourism; Dustin reported the sponsor thanked the council for input and said they would “keep it in mind” for future work but did not commit to returning with specific revisions this session.
