Jeremy Johnson, long‑range planner for Kittitas County Community Development Services, told the Board of County Commissioners on Dec. 23 that Washington’s Senate Bill 5290 requires jurisdictions to comply with new maximum processing timelines beginning Jan. 1, 2025. He said the law divides land‑use decisions into three types — purely administrative decisions, administrative decisions requiring public notice, and decisions that require a public hearing — and assigns a separate maximum timeline to each.

"The whole point of this bill is to speed up permitting timelines and make it more predictable for applicants," Johnson said, explaining the county must adopt procedures to show when the statute’s clock starts, stops and resumes. He described stop‑the‑clock provisions that allow the county to pause processing when it requests missing information and then resume the statutory timeline once that material arrives.

Johnson recommended a fee‑timeline approach the county staff has modeled as an "80/20" option: collect roughly 80% of permit fees at application and hold 20% in reserve to refund when the county misses a statutory timeline. "The bill allows for up to 20% to be refunded if you don't meet the timelines," he said, adding the refund would be based on the actual processing time used.

Chad Bales, CDS director, said staff will look further at how the mandate affects county application fees and reporting obligations. "There is a reporting mechanism to this thing," he said, noting annual performance reports must show how many permits met the timeframes (for example at 65 days, 100 days and 170 days).

County staff said they will return with draft code or regulations and a white paper describing options, and that implementation may require training and potential software adjustments (the presentation referenced SmartDev as a possible tool). Commissioners asked for time to review materials over the holiday before staff brings a formal recommendation to an agenda meeting.

The next procedural step is for staff to prepare proposed regulatory language and options for the board; no formal action was taken at the Dec. 23 study session.