Counties Could Bail Out Of Gma But Keep Funds Locke Says He Can’t Support Bill Unless Cities Have Voice In Process

Washington taxpayers have spent about $15 million on land-use planning that could be abandoned under a bill now before the Legislature.

House Bill 2542 would allow rural counties to withdraw from the 1990 Growth Management Act without repaying money they’ve received from the state to help them comply with the act.

County officials could make the decision without input from the cities within their boundaries. City councils often support the GMA, while commissioners in many counties - particularly rural counties - despise it.

Twenty of the state’s 29 counties currently required to comply with the GMA would meet the bill’s definition of “rural.” Each has received from $334,000 to $1.8 million in state aid. They’ve also spent large amounts of local money to comply with the act.

For six years, some legislators have tried to weaken or eliminate the GMA. All but the most benign bills have either died in the Legislature or been vetoed by the governor.

Unless it is greatly modified, HB2542 likely will meet the same fate as the others.

A story about the bill in Friday’s Spokesman-Review stated that Gov. Gary Locke supports the bill. Actually, his staff said Friday, Locke would consider letting small counties “opt out” of GMA, but only if cities have a say in the matter.

HB2542 “does not meet the governor’s criteria,” Locke’s staff wrote in a statement.

The bill was introduced by Rep. Joyce Mulliken, R-Ephrata, a long-time opponent of the act. Frustrated that two counties she represents are mired in battles with the state over GMA, Mulliken last June threatened Denny Dellwo, a member of the state panel charged with settling GMA disputes in Eastern Washington.

“Denny, you leave Grant County alone or else I’ll get you!” Mulliken said following a Spokane hearing last June. “And Kittitas County too.”

Kittitas and Grant counties are among those that could opt out of the GMA under Mulliken’s bill. Others in Eastern Washington include Chelan, Stevens and Ferry - all of which have had their own GMA battles.

There is little doubt commissioners in those and other counties would rather not comply with the act if given the choice. Commissioners from several counties said as much during a hearing Thursday in Olympia.

Many residents in rural areas consider the act a violation of private property rights because it forces counties to designate areas where urban growth will not be allowed.

Such strong feelings often turn a candidate’s position on GMA into a key campaign issue. Voters in Stevens County last year elected a commission candidate who called the GMA unconstitutional, for instance.

But a militant stance against GMA worked against two Chelan County commissioners, whom voters replaced in 1996.

At the time of the election, Chelan County had spent more than $100,000 challenging the GMA in court and were losing $140,000 a month in state highway funds because they refused to comply with the law. The state money was refunded last year, when the newly elected commissioner promised to obey the law.

, DataTimes ILLUSTRATION: Graphic: The cost of GMA changes