From the Director: 2008 Legislative Session: Limited Agenda - Positive Results

The 2008 session, like most even-year, election-year sessions, was characterized by the Legislature’s desire to come to Olympia, address "must-do" or noncontroversial issues and adjourn. The one "must do" item of the past session was the adoption of a supplemental budget. That task was made more difficult by a revised revenue forecast reducing anticipated state revenues by nearly $425 million, coupled with a desire to have sufficient reserves to accommodate an anticipated 2009-2011 biennium revenue shortfall of $2 billion plus. Aside from the supplemental budget, the other issue that many legislators felt compelled to address was that of climate change.

AWC recognized it was unlikely our high priority issues would be addressed in any significant fashion this session because most of those carry a high price tag. During the 2008 session the Legislature was committed to "squirreling" away money for the next biennium's State budget. AWC’s lobbyists did make progress in communicating cities’ and towns’ need for infrastructure assistance and other financial aid, hopefully setting the stage for significant action next year or soon thereafter.

 In general the 2008 session was positive for AWC. This year, more so than in the recent past, we were able to resolve our conflicts with traditional adversaries. This success has enabled AWC to be perceived of as an organization desirous of finding solutions, as opposed to one that simply opposes adverse legislation. That has enhanced an already strong reputation regarding our ability to work collegially within the legislative process, and curry the favor of those legislators whose legislation may have been initially adverse to city interests.

This posture has also increased the willingness of legislators to be more responsive to cities’ concerns. While we didn’t always prevail, our lobbyists have succeeded in convincing legislators of the validity of the "city story". Our lobbyists are important but most of our success is attributable to the efforts of both elected and appointed city officials who went the extra mile to contact and meet with their legislators, and backstop the messages that our lobbyists have been conveying.

While the agenda was limited this year, there were nonetheless a number of beneficial measures for cities and towns enacted into law. Following is a brief review of both the positive measures and the defensive issues that were derailed.

Beneficial Issues

Here is a brief review of some of those beneficial issues enacted this past session.

Gang Task Force Recommendations (E2SHB 2712) –This legislation, the result of an interim study, provides a number of useful tools for cities to address the rising problem of gang activity. Among those tools are clarification of what constitutes a gang and gang activity; limited funding for law enforcement and graffiti abatement; and additional penalties for gang-related offenses. While there is some funding in the 2007-09 supplemental budget, it is expected that there will be additional funding in the 2009-11 biennial budget.

State Revenues for Public Safety (ESSB 6573) – This legislation will initiate a biennial appropriation to provide direct distributions for public safety to cities, counties, and fire districts, and provide resources for a new LEOFF 2 benefit enhancement. The measure provides $5 million for the 2011-13 biennium increasing to $50 million by the 2017 biennium and thereafter. Half of each appropriation will be allocated for public safety purposes and provided to local governments in proportion to the number of LEOFF 2 employees relative to the total.

Local Solutions to Climate Change (ESSB 6580) – While initially opposed by AWC due to additional GMA planning requirements, over the course of several months of discussions with proponents, the bill was scaled back considerably. AWC supported the bill in its final form which provides a stakeholder process to determine what should be the appropriate responses from cities to address climate change. The legislation directs the Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development to develop models and tools for cities. This is an example of an extremely controversial measure that was ultimately modified to address a number of AWC concerns, and yet advance the policy issue.

Defensive Issues

The 2008 session did include a number of defensive issues but none more important than HB 3292 requiring taping of executive sessions and ESHB 1873 relating to wrongful injury or death causes of action.

Requiring Taping of Executive Sessions (HB 3292) – This measure, introduced at the request of the State Attorney General and State Auditor, would have required that every executive session be taped, and the tapes reviewable pursuant to court action, if credible evidence is presented that the subjects discussed during the executive session were beyond those authorized by law. The legislation, sponsored by House majority Leader Lynn Kessler, was in response to allegations that local governments were not in compliance with the restrictions applicable to executive sessions, and a means needed to be established to assure compliance. Representative Kessler has already indicated her intent to reintroduce this legislation during the 2009 session.

Wrongful Injury or Death Causes of Action (E3SHB 1873) – This hard fought measure "died" in the closing hours of the session. If approved, the legislation would have significantly expanded the scope of potential claimants and the amount of damages for these types of actions. The Senate’s version of the measure would have increased from 18 to 26 the age at which parents could file a cause of action for the injury or death of a child. The measure would have also expanded damages for both existing and expanded claimants. In the Senate, the bill was amended to address some of the concerns by state and local governments by limiting the application of joint and several liability for certain wrongful death claims. Unfortunately, those changes were not agreed to in the House. Last minute efforts in the Senate to further refine those amendments failed. The bill therefore lacked enough votes to pass, but we expect it will be back again next year.

In Closing

The 2008 legislative session is now history. It was a session in which "politics" and declining state revenues directly impacted the outcome of many measures. On the political front, the majority party was clearly sensitive to the desire to retain the majority and protect vulnerable incumbents. On the revenue side, there was an increasing sensitivity to preserving cash balances for the upcoming biennium and not expend any more then necessary in the supplemental budget.

Overall it was a good session, especially considering the magnitude of adverse legislation we encountered. In the end we were able to secure a number of positive issues and derail legislation with negative city impacts. The legislative process is a continuum. Many of our issues are multi-year and we’ve made progress in establishing the notion that cities are partners with the state in the intergovernmental mosaic that serves our state’s 6.5 million residents.

Thanks for your help this year!

[ return to top ] [ next article ]