Local permits and Washington's Growth Management Act

Local permits and Washington’s Growth Management Act

Last week I wrote a citizen’s view column about the proposal for 214 Maple Avenue (the old COA) and promised that I would write more this week about the condition that is hardest to understand: (e) The proposal, through findings, satisfies the goals and policies of La Conner’s comprehensive plan and floodplain ordinance and the state Shoreline Management Act. I will address the Comp Plan only here.

Long ago the Washington State Legislature passed the Growth Management Act

The GMA established the comprehensive plan as the cornerstone of the Growth Management Act. It gave comprehensive plans legal weight and is the instrument by which jurisdictions became accountable for consistent regulation of development.

Hence, the criteria (e) in our code about the comp plan is the strongest criteria (in my opinion) of the conditions which must be met - and the most difficult to understand.

Basically we must be consistent with state and countywide planning policies and the thirteen GMA planning goals listed in RCW 36.70A.020.

Or we are possibly in deep doo-doo.

One of these statewide goals is:

4) Housing. Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. La Conner has the same goal.

So – is this all just blah blah?

NO.

RCW 36.70A.345: The governor may impose a sanction or sanctions…on… (4) a county or city that fails to adopt its comprehensive plan or development regulations when such actions are required to be taken. (La Conner doesn’t have to develop – we just have to make it possible to have space that can be developed into residences.)

These sanctions could look like:

• State treasurer withholding the motor vehicle fuel tax ($18,145.89 in 2023)

• State treasurer withholding the sale and use tax ($583,308.58 in 2023)

• The liquor profit tax ($7,492.94 in 2023)

• The liquor excise tax ($6,871.23 in 2023)

• No authority to collect real estate excise tax ($93,314.56 in 2023)

It probably wouldn’t happen – but it could.

So when you write your letter to the hearing examiner, consider that it isn’t a matter of how many letters come in but what the letters say. Consider the criteria that must be met for a conditional use permit. And consider what is the highest and best purpose for that property. But truth be known, what you think is unlikely to matter since what you think is not one of the criteria.

So if you live in town, get that keyboard out and get into action.

Decades-long La Conner resident Linda Talman served on the town's planning commission for most of her life here.