Spokane County hears Olympia update; commissioners oppose state preemption on public camping, weigh public-health cuts
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
County lobbyist Mike Burgess briefed commissioners on session cutoffs and multiple bills, including a proposed income tax revenue share for public defense, a public-camping preemption bill that would curb local control, and pending waste-to-energy emission targets; county staff will follow up before committee hearings.
Mike Burgess, Spokane County’s lobbyist, told the Board of County Commissioners on Feb. 3 that the Legislature’s policy committee cutoff falls Feb. 4 and the fiscal cutoff is Feb. 9, setting tight timelines for several bills affecting county authority and budgets.
Burgess flagged an income-tax proposal that would direct 5% of revenue to county public defense programs. "Five percent of the revenue generated from the income tax bill would go to public defense funding for counties," he said, noting bill language was just being posted. He did not ask for an immediate reaction but asked commissioners to be aware of the provision.
Commissioners discussed Senate Bill 6239, which would require arbitration for tort claims against the state and, per staff request, the county will add the measure to its support list. Burgess also warned about a bill (referred to in materials as 2489) that would preempt local authority on public camping, a change several commissioners said they would oppose. "I would be opposed to it," one commissioner said, reflecting the board’s concern that the bill would remove local discretion on camping bans and similar ordinances.
On environmental and land-use measures, Burgess said a substitute for a waste-to-energy bill was scheduled for committee consideration and contains phased greenhouse-gas reduction targets tied to a 2014–2016 baseline: 20% by 2030, 70% by 2040 and 95% by 2050. He also briefed the board on an aquifer recharge bill moving in the Senate and ongoing work to seek amendments to a tax-increment-financing measure on which the county hopes to be included.
Commissioners asked staff to review a newly posted substitute that would allow residential development in commercial zones and asked that Scott and Chesney be consulted before the bill’s Feb. 5 hearing. Burgess agreed to circulate the substitute language and bring the issue back the following week.
Why it matters: Several of the bills Burgess described would change local authority or affect county budgets. Commissioners signaled opposition to state preemption on camping and asked staff to track fiscal implications, especially for public-health funding and county programs.
What’s next: Staff will circulate substitute bill language for local review and the county will continue to monitor and, where appropriate, take positions ahead of legislative committee deadlines.