By Tim Gould, Legislative Chair
The 2018 Legislative session was a roller coaster ride for environmentalists featuring major victories and hugely disappointing setbacks, with the significant distinguishing feature that the Legislature concluded on time this year in 60 days. Yet, the lack of progress on important energy and climate issues leaves an unsatisfying feeling that Legislators were incomplete in addressing key challenges for the state when they adjourned from the Capitol.
The outcome for Sierra Club’s top two Legislative priorities exemplified the dichotomy of 2018 policy making. With the passage of ESSB 6091, the water rights Hirst court decision was overturned putting stream flows at risk in water basins where exempt wells have and will now continue to proliferate. Meanwhile, a phase out and ban on net pen operations for nonnative fish species was enacted and signed into law. (see related article p. 1)
While Sierra Club had been successful in pushing Legislative champions to defend the Hirst decision last year, Democrats caved into the Republican’s insistence on weakening water rules to enable more rural development before allowing approval of Capital budget spending (super-majority requirement). ESSB 6091 sets large volume daily use standards, allows mitigation that is not water-for-water, and lacks metering requirements, all of which make ensuring adequate in-stream flows for fish much more challenging.
Both Senate and House advanced bills to prohibit state-owned aquatic lands from use for nonnative finfish aquaculture after existing leases expire. While the Senator Kevin Ranker-sponsored Senate bill did not advance in the House, advocacy work by the Club’s North Olympic Group helped Rep. Kris Lytton and Rep. Mike Chapman to advance EHB 2957, which was approved in the House by a bipartisan margin of 67-31. The bill then passed the Senate 31-16 on the last day for policy bill floor action, which puts an end to Atlantic salmon farming and its negative effects on native species.
The Governor-request carbon emission tax (SB 6203) originally proposed a carbon tax of $20./metric ton of CO2 that would rise annually by 3.5% plus inflation. Less ambitious versions passed the Senate Energy, Environment & Technology, and then Senate Ways and Means Committees, but the bill lacked votes for floor action in the full Senate. With the bill stalling in the Legislature, a carbon fee and invest proposal to voters was filed by the Alliance for Jobs and Clean Energy (see related article in this issue).
Efforts to build on the Energy Independence Act approved by voters (2006) in the form of I-937 were introduced, but controversy over allowable renewable energy sources and tax incentives for new resource investments prevented any bills from gaining majority support. Sierra Club backed Rep. Gael Tarleton’s SHB 2402, which required utilities to meet targets for energy conservation and the portion of electric energy from eligible renewable resources. A stepped phase out of fossil fuel generating resources, 2SSB 6253 sponsored by Senator Ranker, raised concerns over inclusion of nuclear energy in the mix of future resources. Attempts to reconcile these approaches were unsuccessful leading to introduction late in session by Rep. Tarleton of HB 2995 which would require utilities to reduce fossil fuel generated energy in steps reaching a complete phase out by 2045. She and Rep. Gerry Pollet were stalwarts for our position on nuclear power (see related article), but the disagreement over tax incentives and utility opposition resulted in the session clock running out on HB 2995.
Improved building energy standards received a boost with passage of HB 1622, which directs additional funding to the State Building Code Council, tasked with increasing energy efficiency. We pushed for improved appliance efficiency (HB 2327) but opposition from appliance manufacturers led the Senate Energy, Environment & Technology Committee to remove the energy provisions and retain only the water use efficiency standards; yet the bill languished at session end.
In transportation, the Senate Transportation Committee agreed with us not to use multi-modal account funds that support transit service as a funding source to pay for electric vehicle purchase sales tax credits, thus stopping HB 2653 from advancing. While electric vehicle tax credits are beneficial, we do not support taking money from transit to pay for them because of mobility, climate footprint, and equity issues. Sound Transit 3 funding emerged unscathed again after the House did not bring SB 5955 to a vote, a measure that would have adjusted car tab fee valuations while providing backfill revenue to mostly offset the reduced vehicle excise tax collected by Sound Transit.
Oil transport spill prevention was improved by passage of SB 6269, which extends the oil tax per barrel to pipelines. This helps fund spills prevention work at Dept. of Ecology, which will convene a Salish Sea Shared Waters forum to reduce oil spill risk.
Energy and climate action now shifts to voter initiative signature gathering as we seek progress via the November general election ballot.