The State Building Code Council’s residential code TAG on Tuesday tabled two staff reports and set a schedule to continue review next week after members said they needed more time to study proposed edits. Tag chair Angela Haupt convened the virtual meeting, and staff presented a draft existing-amendments review and a separate significant-changes review prepared to align Washington amendments with the 2024 International Residential Code.

Members said the materials arrived on short notice and that more detailed review was necessary. “If it was up to me in a perfect world, what I would suggest is that we get one week to review these documents,” said Josh Mergans, owner of Balanced Structural Engineering. Tag staff agreed to send a scheduling poll and to plan additional meetings next week, with some members urging twice-weekly, three-hour sessions to meet the council’s calendar.

Why it matters: the TAG’s reports inform rulemaking filings (CR-101/CR-102/CR-103) that must follow the Administrative Procedure Act timeline before final adoption. Tag members said they are trying to keep to the council’s schedule for December adoption while ensuring adequate technical review.

Staff described the two reports as editorial and organizational: the existing-amendments review lists current Washington amendments and shows where model-code numbering or wording changed; the significant-changes review highlights where model-code updates either remove the need for an existing state amendment or require the amendment to move to a new section. Dustin Curb, managing director for State Building Code Council staff, said staff drafted the reports to reduce later formatting work and to speed the cycle but acknowledged members’ concerns about preparation time.

Formal actions taken during the meeting included votes to delay formal action on both reports so the TAG can review them in more detail. Patrick Hanks moved to table the existing-amendments report until the next meeting; the motion was seconded and carried. Later in the meeting members moved and approved tabling the significant-changes review until the next meeting as well.

The TAG also approved several procedural items earlier in the session (agenda approval, and accepting preliminary edits for the preface and Chapter 1 staff recommendations) but the substantive adoption work on Chapters 2–A and individual amendments will proceed after the follow-up meetings. Staff will notify proposal proponents and circulate a poll to schedule the extra TAG sessions.

The TAG preserved quorum and agreed to reconvene; meeting organizers said they will post updated meeting invitations after the poll and notify proponents listed on the rulemaking page.