Commerce and counties describe implementing SB 5290 timelines, grants and local 2-by-6 review pilots

State agencies and local governments presented the committee with implementation updates for recent permit-reform bills, focusing on Senate Bill 5290 (the Local Project Review Act), grants to improve permitting systems, and local pilot processes designed to meet statutory timelines.

Kellen Wright, committee staff, reviewed a list of recent bills that change permitting and development requirements for specific project types, including timelines for permit review and statutory changes for middle housing, ADUs, lot splits, parking limits, and transit-oriented density rules.

Dave Anderson of the Washington Department of Commerce explained Commerce's SB 5290 responsibilities. Commerce has published guidance on local project review and convened a 30-member digital permitting work group. Commerce concluded feasibility studies and recommended against creating a single statewide permitting system and against using state agency staff as substitutes for local reviewers, citing accountability and project risk concerns. Instead, Commerce recommended interlocal contracts, consultant lists, and grants to support local system upgrades. Commerce awarded grants to several jurisdictions to upgrade permitting systems and provide staff training and has requested additional funding to continue the program.

Commerce also now requires an annual performance report from large jurisdictions (metro counties and their cities over 20,000) to be sent to the department by March 1 each year; Commerce will compile and publish statewide results by July. Early 2024 reporting showed challenges including missing or incomplete timeline data, construction permits taking longer than statutory timeframes, and capacity and staffing constraints. Commerce identified jurisdictions that performed comparatively well (Bellingham, Clark County, Vancouver) and emphasized digital permitting, a single coordinator for complex projects, pre-application conferences and preapproved plans as leading practices.

Local jurisdictions described their implementation approaches. Kitsap County reported a "2-by-6" predictable review process (two six-week review cycles) launched after stakeholder outreach, new intake screening and a GIS-based prep report that flags on-parcel critical areas so applicants know which technical reports are expected at intake. Kitsap uses a fee model based on historical review time, contracts third-party reviewers for overflow, and warned that rigid timelines can be less well suited to complex or multiagency projects (for example when Ecology review is required). Kitsap also warned that staffing turnover and funding instability can limit sustained capacity to meet future surges.

Issaquah's mayor described a parallel local effort: a complete land use code rewrite, increased SEPA thresholds for a future urban core, improved standard operating procedures, optional pre-permit meetings, a permit center coordinator position and quarterly reporting to the city council. Mayor Mary Lou Pauli emphasized that permitting improvements require investment in tools and people; she noted an interlocal eCitygov Alliance permitting system exists but needs upgrades and that prior legislative funding requests to modernize that tool were not funded.

Committee members asked about next steps: Commerce said it will continue guidance and grant programs, publish performance reporting, and support preapproved plans and other promising local practices. Several lawmakers recommended tagging bills that include SEPA exemptions and reporting effective dates so the committee can track implementation.