Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee considers permit‑review reforms and contested vesting changes
Summary
HB 2418 would apply project permit review timelines to fee‑charging entities, pause review clocks for unpaid fees or missing notices, require a single permit responsible official, and set vesting windows (two years for ≤50 units; three years for >50). Builders and counties welcomed permitting fixes but strongly contested the vesting language.
Committee staff summarized House Bill 24 18 as a permit‑process reform package aimed at improving predictability for project permit reviews. Kellen Wright said the bill would require that project permit applications for residential units in urban growth areas be reviewed under the development regulations in place at the time the application was determined complete, with vesting periods of two years for projects of 50 or fewer units and three years for projects with more than 50 units.
The bill would also pause the permit review clock during any period an applicant has not paid fees or posted required notice and would make certain external fee‑charging entities (public utilities, water/sewer districts, the Department of Ecology, flood control districts) subject to the same timeline requirements if they charge a review fee. If those entities miss their deadline, they would have to refund 20% of the fee collected.
Stakeholders were broadly aligned on the need to speed permitting, but support fractured on vesting. Andrea Smiley (Building Industry Association of Washington), Riley Benge (Commercial Real Estate Development Association), and other builders said HB 24 18 would help reduce delays if vesting language is amended or removed. FutureWise and the Washington State Association of Counties raised concerns that the proposed vesting changes would unsettle existing vesting doctrine (case law), could leave out critical area protections such as steep‑slope regulations, and invite litigation. Curt Wilson (Sound Built Homes) warned that altering the date or duration of vesting would increase risk for project proponents and lenders.
Committee members said they heard clear and diverse stakeholder input and signaled intent to address vesting in future drafts. The hearing closed without committee action. No formal votes were recorded in this session.
