The Land Use Study Commission was created by the 1995 Legislature with several missions. These included the development of a consolidated land use code, an evaluation of efforts at integrating and consolidating land use and environmental procedures, and an evaluation of the effectiveness of state land use and environmental laws. The Commission was given approximately three years to complete its tasks. The Commission sunsets on June 30, 1998. It is likely that some of the tasks assigned to the Commission will remain unfinished. This raises the question of whether the Commission should be reauthorized in the same or similar form.

Governor Lowry issued Executive Order 93-06 in August 1993. The Executive Order directed state agencies to make several changes to the way they conduct their regulatory activities. In addition, the Executive Order also called for the creation of the Governor's Task Force on Regulatory Reform. The Task Force's duties included an examination of the way land use and environmental statutes interacted. The Task Force was asked to make recommendations to the Governor in December 1993 and December 1994.

In December 1994, the Task Force issued its final report and proposed a package of statutory changes affecting Washington's land use and environmental statutes. The report and legislation recommended the creation of a new entity to continue the work begun by the Task Force. The Task Force’s proposals were introduced as HB 1724 and passed the legislature largely intact. Sections 701 - 708 of ESHB 1724 created the Land Use Study Commission.

The Commission’s duties are spelled out in RCW 90.61. The statute states that the

Commission’s goal shall be the integration and consolidation of the state’s land use and environmental laws into a single, manageable statute. In fulfilling its responsibilities, the commission shall evaluate the effectiveness of the growth management act, the state environmental policy act, the shoreline management act, and other state land use, planning, environmental, and permitting statutes in achieving their stated goals."

RCW 90.61.010. The Commission was also charged with a number of more specific duties.

The Commission has fourteen members, 11 appointed by the Governor and three the directors of state agencies. The eleven appointed members are to represent a cross section of those interested in land use and environmental issues, including business, labor, cities, counties, environmental, tribes, and the public. Governor Lowry appointed members of the Commission in September 1995. The Director of the Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development (DCTED), or the director’s designee, is the chair of the Commission. Mike Fitzgerald, then director of DCTED, appointed T. Ryan Durkan, a land use attorney in Seattle, as his designee and chair.

The Commission has created a number of advisory committees to assist it in its work. In addition, because there are no legislative members, the Commission formed a Legislative Sounding Board in June 1996 to seek advice and comment from the Legislature. Each of the four caucuses was invited to send two members. The Legislative Sounding Board held two meetings prior to the 1997 session.

The Commission has two full-time staff. In addition, it receives substantial assistance from other state agencies as well as from local governments, the private sector, and the tribes.

The Commission holds monthly meetings. At one of its early meetings it decided to make its decisions by consensus, although one member voted against this decision.

The Commission is scheduled to sunset on June 30, 1998.

The Commission is required to make annual reports to the Governor and the Legislature. Its first report, in November 1995, contained no recommendations. The Commission spent most of the first part of 1996 holding public hearings around the state to collect information and opinions about the Growth Management Act and related environmental statutes. The Commission invited groups and individuals with an interest in land use and environmental issues to present their concerns to the Commission.

From a lengthy list of topics, the Commission focussed on twelve different issues. The Commission prepared a set of issue papers discussing each of these items and made decisions based on those papers. After a series of public meetings on its draft report in October and November 1996, the Commission made its final recommendations in January 1997. The recommendations were adopted by consensus. Commission members supported its recommendations during the legislative process.

In addition to those topics it developed through this process, both Governor Lowry and Governor Locke have asked the Commission to assist in resolving matters that had resulted in legislation the Governor was unable to sign. Governor Lowry, in his partial veto of SSB 6337 in 1996 asked the Commission to look at the authority of Growth Management Hearings Boards to invalidate comprehensive plans and development regulations. The Commission’s recommendations to the 1997 Legislature included provisions designed to address these concerns and were signed into law.

Governor Locke, in his veto of HB 1472 in 1997 asked the Commission to address the issue of mineral resource lands designations. Each of the last three Governors

The recommendations were introduced as Executive Request legislation by Governor Locke. This Executive Request legislation had bipartisan sponsorship on both chambers, with the prime sponsor in each house being the chair of the Committee to which the bill was assigned.

At the end of the session, ESB 6094 was passed by the Legislature. That measure contained most of the Commission’s recommendations, as well as additional provisions. The Governor vetoed several sections of the bill, however these were not provisions recommended by the Commission.

The Commission’s eleven appointed members represent a range of interests. However, both during Commission deliberations and in the Legislature, there were some challenges to the Commission’s membership. In particular, some in the agriculture and business communities believed their perspectives were not adequately represented. Legislators also noted the lack of any legislative membership.

ESB 6094, as it passed the Legislature, would have added members from each of these groups to the Commission. It provided for two additional agriculture and business representatives and four legislators. Governor Locke vetoed the section adding these additional members.

The Commission has an ambitious work program, one that may not be completed by the time it sunsets in June 1998. Chief among these is the development of a consolidated land use code. This has proved to be a difficult undertaking, perhaps even more so than those who favor it had anticipated. As of October 1997, the Commission has developed an outline of a consolidated code, a number of policy issues have emerged that will require further study. In addition, because of the significant impact that these policies may have on values and interests of nearly every participant in the land use system, the Commission has been asked to be cautious and to involve all interested parties in the review of its recommendations. This will require a considerable amount of time.

Another legislative responsibility involves the review of the permit timelines established by ESHB 1724. At its September 1997 meeting, the Commission made a preliminary conclusion that there was not yet enough experience under the timelines and that additional time for review was necessary. If this is a recommendation that is made to the Legislature, it will be necessary to assign the review task to an agency.

In addition to its legislatively assigned responsibilities, the Commission has been asked by the two Governors to assist in resolving issues that have resulted in legislation that the Governor vetoed.

The Legislature has also attempted to give the Commission additional responsibilities. ESB 6094, as it passed the legislature, directed the Commission to examine the role of the Growth Management Hearings Boards and other environmental appeals boards and the effect of the changes to the standard of review included in ESB 6094. The Governor vetoed these provisions.

Several legislators have expressed concern about the role of the Commission in the policy making process, with some expressing the belief that the Governor, by his expression of support for recommendations of the Commission, had supplanted the Legislature as the policy making body in our form of government.

One issue the Commission had proposed to address as part of its final year’s work plan was ways to address infrastructure finance. The Commission concluded that infrastructure was one of the key components necessary to achieve "environmentally and economically sustainable" growth. However, both House and Senate leadership and the Association of Washington Business expressed concerns about the Commission taking on this task. One concern was because of the lack of time for the Commission to complete all of its assigned tasks, including the development of the consolidated code. In addition, there was also concern that the Commission was not representative and that its recommendations on the subject would not address the concerns of all those concerned about infrastructure and the way it is financed.

The Legislature meets for a limited time each year – 105 days in odd numbered years, 60 days in even numbered years. Over 1000 bills are introduced into each house each session. In a typical year over 300 bills are passed by the legislature and sent to the Governor. Faced with this volume of legislation, legislative committees find themselves frequently swamped by bills and with insufficient time to hold hearings on all of the bills that have been introduced and for which sponsors desire hearings. In the past, the Legislature held more frequent committee hearings between legislative sessions. However, over the last few years there has been a movement towards limiting the number of meetings.

An entity with the responsibility for addressing a particular issue can be one means to assist the Legislature with its workload. The assistance can be both one of providing a forum for discussion and possible resolution of issues as well as potentially reducing the number of pieces of legislation that might be introduced.

Legislators are in the unenviable position of needing to make decisions concerning a wide array of subject matters, many of which require a considerable degree of technical expertise. Legislative staff are also expected to be knowledgeable on a wide array of subjects. A separate study entity can assist the Legislature by providing objective technical expertise and support that might not otherwise be available to the Legislature. Although considerable information is available to the Legislature, much of it comes from the point of view of different interest groups. A study entity devoted to a particular subject matter can assist the legislature by sorting through the information and assuring the Legislature is presented with a more complete set of facts.

The State Building Code Council is established by statute. Members are appointed by the Governor from a specific list of identified organizations or interests. Terms of membership are specified. The Council elects its chair from among its members. The Legislature may appoint ex officio members.

The Timber, Fish, and Wildlife coalition (TFW) is a voluntary accord between the state, federal, and tribal governments, the timber industry, and the environmental community. The TFW operates by consensus. Both the Forest Practices Board and the Legislature have shown considerable deference to the work of the coalition on those issues over which consensus has been reached. For example, the 1997 Legislature enacted changes recommended by the TFW to the laws governing forest practice conversions. SSB 5714 passed both houses of the Legislature with no dissenting votes.

Governor Lowry established the Regulatory Reform Task Force by Executive Order. He solicited members from business, state and local government, and the public. The Task Force was given a set of specific tasks and an expiration date. Although not directed to do so by the Governor, the Task Force decided to make decisions on a consensus basis. Its recommendations were incorporated into legislation that was adopted by the 1994 and 1995 Legislatures. Although not without controversy, the Task Force proposals could probably be characterized as balancing the competing concerns of different interests. Unlike the TFW recommendations, the Task Force proposals did not receive unanimous votes.

The Growth Strategies Commission was also established by Executive Order, this time by Governor Gardner in 1989. Governor Gardner appointed 13 individuals and four legislators to the Commission. Governor Gardner gave the Commission some specific tasks to accomplish. The Commission’s recommendations were introduced in the 1990 Legislature. Different legislation was eventually enacted by the legislature. As part of that legislation, the Commission was asked by the Legislature to take up additional issues.

The public stadium authority presents an alternative means for appointment of members to a body. As enacted by the 1997 Legislature, the stadium authority has members seven members appointed by the Governor. The leadership of the four major cacuses in the House and Senate may each recommend a name to the Governor.

Addresses concerns about representation

Allows Legislature to reassert authority to make policy

The existing statute would remain in place, including the membership and method of appointment and the duties.

Continues a forum that has proved successful in developing consensus recommendations

Allows continuing work on tasks that will be only partially complete by June 1998

The Commission membership would be revised to add or modify the interests to be represented. Legislative representation would be included. Appointment of non-legislators would remain with the Governor. The existing Commission might be allowed to continue for a short period to overlap with the new entity to allow for a smooth transition. [An alternative that might be considered would be modify the appointment process – perhaps giving the Governor and each House a set number of appointments. Another alternative would be to require Senate Confirmation of Commission members. Another alternative would be to require the Governor to select representation from names submitted by specific organizations.]

Addresses representation concerns and may also address legislative response concerns

Continues a forum that has proved successful in developing consensus recommendations

Allows continuing work on tasks that will be only partially complete by June 1998

The Legislature could create a Joint Legislative Committee with representation form each of the caucuses and the responsibility to focus on the topics assigned to the Commission.

Allows legislature to develop expertise on issues

Places responsibility for developing policy in the legislative branch

Does not require the creation of a new agency

Can allow an agency with expertise to provide a forum

Places policy making at a high level within the Executive Branch

Allows Governor to better coordinate state agency response to issues

May require additional resources for Governor’s office