Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administration Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
WSU proposes administrative‑code updates for facility rentals and trespass procedures
Summary
WSU proposed revisions to Washington Administrative Code covering non‑First Amendment facility use and conduct on university property; changes include published lists of approving authorities, standard facility use agreements, risk‑management notifications and clearer administrative trespass and appeal procedures.
Danielle Hess, WSU’s executive director for policy and governance, presented proposed revisions to two university administrative regulations: the facilities use rules (WAC 504‑35) for non‑First Amendment rentals and the conduct on university property regulation (WAC 504‑31).
Key changes for facilities use: The draft revisions remove obsolete references (for example, to a campus use committee that no longer exists), require each campus’s risk management office to maintain a website list of commonly rented facilities and the approving authorities for those spaces, require signed facility use agreements for all outside rentals and direct approving authorities to charge fees that recoup direct and indirect costs. The changes also give approving authorities explicit discretion to deny requests that would disrupt university activities and require risk management notification for higher‑risk events (examples noted include events with 100+ non‑university attendees, amplified sound, alcohol service, use of airspace and events requiring non‑university law enforcement coordination).
Key changes for conduct on university property: The regulation has been broadened from “campus” to “property” to capture owned and leased locations. The revision clarifies administrative trespass notice contents, differentiates orders less than 24 hours (non‑appealable) from longer bans (appealable), and requires notification to student affairs or HR when a current student or employee is trespassed from areas needed for work or study. Appeal processes are specified for students, faculty and employees with campus‑appropriate review pathways.
Why it matters: University leaders said the revisions modernize processes, reduce operational risk and ensure central awareness when high‑risk events are approved at a campus level. Hess said no public comments were received during the rulemaking comment period and that central offices will coordinate rollout and communications with approving authorities.
Ending: The committee was briefed that the Board of Regents will be asked to approve the revised administrative regulations at its next meeting.
