Allowing fire protection district annexations and mergers within a reasonable geographic proximity.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when HB 2576 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on HB 2576.
You're tracking HB 2576
We'll email you the moment it moves.
HB 2576 — Allowing fire protection district annexations and mergers within a reasonable geographic proximity.
Last action — Effective date 6/7/2018.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed House
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2018. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
3 sponsors
1 primary, 2 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Bipartisan support
Sponsored across 2 parties (1 R · 1 D) — cross-party backing.
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 2 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
1 added · 1 removedPlain-language change summary
The amendments to Bill HB 2576 update language regarding the annexation of fire protection districts, specifying that areas need to be "located within reasonable proximity" rather than simply "adjacent." This change is important because it broadens the scope of eligible territories for annexation, allowing fire districts greater flexibility in expanding their services to nearby communities that may not be directly adjacent but still close enough to benefit from the protection offered. Moreover, it clarifies definitions and processes to ensure more communities can access fire protection services effectively.
H-4093.1SUBSTITUTEH-3448.1HOUSE HOUSE BILL 2576State of Washington65th Legislature2018 Regular SessionBy House Local Government (originally sponsored by Representatives Griffey, Springer, and McBride)READMcBrideRead FIRSTfirst TIMEtime 01/25/18.AN01/10/18. ACT Relating to allowing fire protection district annexations and mergers within a reasonable geographic proximity;
andReferred amending RCW 52.04.011, 52.06.090, 52.26.030, 52.04.031, 52.26.020, 52.26.060, and 52.26.300.BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:Sec. 1. RCW 52.04.011 and 2015 c 53 s 73 are each amended to readCommittee ason follows:(1)Local AGovernment.AN territoryACT ((adjacent))Relating located within reasonable proximity to aallowing fire protection district annexations and notmergers within the boundaries of a city,reasonable town,geographic orproximity; other fire protection district may be annexed to the fire protection district by petition of fifteen percent of the qualified registered electors residing within the territory proposed to be annexed.
and amending RCW 52.04.031, 52.26.020, 52.26.060, and 52.26.300.BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:Sec. 1. RCW 52.04.031 and 1999 c 105 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:A petition for annexation of an area ((adjacent)) located within reasonable proximity to a fire district shall be in writing, addressed to and filed with the board of fire commissioners of the district to which annexation is desired.
The petition shall be filed with the fire commissioners of the fire protection district and if the fire commissioners concur in the petition they shall file the petition with the county auditor of the county within which the territory is located.
If this territory is located in more than one county, the original petition shall be filed with the auditor of the county within which the largest portion of the territory is located, who shall be designated as the lead auditor, and a copy shall be filed with the auditor of each other county within which such territory is located.
Within thirty days after the date of the filing of the petition the auditor shall examine the signatures on the petition and certify to the sufficiency or insufficiency of the signatures.
If this territory is located in more than one county, the auditor of each other county who receives a copy of the petition shall examine the signatures and certify to the lead auditor the number of valid signatures and the number of registered voters residing in that portion of the territory that is located within the county.
The lead auditor shall certify the sufficiency or insufficiency of the signatures.After the county auditor has certified the sufficiency of the petition, the county legislative authority or authorities, or the boundary review board or boards, of the county or counties in which such territory is located shall consider the proposal under the same basis that a proposed incorporation of a fire protection district is considered, with the same authority to act on the proposal as in a proposed incorporation, as provided under chapter 52.02 RCW.
If the proposed annexation is approved by the county legislative authority or boundary review board, the board of fire commissioners shall adopt a resolution requesting the county auditor to call a special election, as specified under RCW 29A.04.330, at which the ballot proposition is to be submitted.
No annexation shall occur when the territory proposed to be annexed is located in more than one county unless the county legislative authority or boundary review board of each county approves the proposed annexation.(2) The county legislative authority or authorities of the county or counties within which such territory is located have the authority and duty to determine on an equitable basis, the amount of any obligation which the territory to be annexed to the district shall assume to place the property owners of the existing district on a fair and equitable relationship with the property owners of the territory to be annexed as a result of the benefits of annexing to a district previously supported by the property owners of the existing district.
If a boundary review board has had its jurisdiction invoked on the proposal and approves the proposal, the county legislative authority of the county within which such territory is located may exercise the authority granted in this subsection and require such an assumption of indebtedness.
This obligation may be paid to the district in yearly benefit charge installments to be fixed by the county legislative authority.
This benefit charge shall be collected with the annual tax levies against the property in the annexed territory until fully paid.
The amount of the obligation and the plan of payment established by the county legislative authority shall be described in general terms in the notice of election for annexation and shall be described in the ballot proposition on the proposed annexation that is presented to the voters for their approval or rejection.
Such benefit charge shall be limited to an amount not to exceed a total of fifty cents per thousand dollars of assessed valuation:
PROVIDED, HOWEVER, That the special election on the proposed annexation shall be held only within the boundaries of the territory proposed to be annexed to the fire protection district.(3) On the entry of the order of the county legislative authority incorporating the territory into the existing fire protection district, the territory shall become subject to the indebtedness, bonded or otherwise, of the existing district.
If the petition is signed by sixty percent of the qualified registered electors residing within the territory proposed to be annexed, and if the board of fire commissioners concur, an election in the territory and a hearing on the petition shall be dispensed with and the county legislative authority shall enter its order incorporating the territory into the existing fire protection district.Sec. 2. RCW 52.06.090 and 2014 c 25 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:A part of one district may be transferred and merged with ((an adjacent district)) a district located within reasonable proximity if the area can be better served by the merged district.
To effect such a merger, a petition, signed by a majority of the commissioners of the merging district or signed by not less than fifteen percent of the qualified electors residing in the area to be merged, shall be filed with the commissioners of the merging district, if signed by electors, or with the commissioners of the merger district if signed by commissioners of the merging district.
If the commissioners of the merging district approve the petition, the petition shall be presented to the commissioners of the merger district.
If the commissioners of the merger district approve the petition, an election shall be called in the area to be merged.In the event that either board of fire district commissioners does not approve the petition, the partial merger must not proceed.A majority of the votes cast is necessary to approve the transfer.Sec. 3. RCW 52.26.030 and 2017 c 196 s 8 are each amended to read as follows:Regional fire protection service authority planning committees are advisory entities that are created, convened, and empowered as follows:(1) Any two or more ((adjacent)) fire protection jurisdictions located within reasonable proximity may create a regional fire protection service authority and convene a regional fire protection service authority planning committee.
No fire protection jurisdiction may participate in more than one created authority.(2) Each governing body of the fire protection jurisdictions participating in planning under this chapter shall appoint three elected officials to the authority planning committee.
Members of the planning committee may receive compensation of seventy dollars per day, or portion thereof, not to exceed seven hundred dollars per year, for attendance at planning committee meetings and for performance of other services in behalf of the authority, and may be reimbursed for travel and incidental expenses at the discretion of their respective governing body.(3) A regional fire protection service authority planning committee may receive state funding, as appropriated by the legislature, or county funding provided by the affected counties for start-up funding to pay for salaries, expenses, overhead, supplies, and similar expenses ordinarily and necessarily incurred.
Upon creation of a regional fire protection service authority, the authority shall within one year reimburse the state or county for any sums advanced for these start-up costs from the state or county.(4) The planning committee shall conduct its affairs and formulate a regional fire protection service authority plan as provided under RCW 52.26.040.(5) At its first meeting, a regional fire protection service authority planning committee may elect officers and provide for the adoption of rules and other operating procedures.(6) The planning committee may dissolve itself at any time by a majority vote of the total membership of the planning committee.
Any participating fire protection jurisdiction may withdraw upon thirty calendar days' written notice to the other jurisdictions.Sec. 4. RCW 52.04.031 and 1999 c 105 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:A petition for annexation of an area ((adjacent)) located within reasonable proximity to a fire district shall be in writing, addressed to and filed with the board of fire commissioners of the district to which annexation is desired.
Such territory may be located in a county or counties other than the county or counties within which the fire protection district is located.
The petition shall state the financial obligation, if any, to be assumed by the area to be annexed.For the purposes of this section, "reasonable proximity" has the same meaning as in RCW 52.26.020.Sec. 5. RCW52.26.020.Sec. 2. RCW 52.26.020 and 2017 c 196 s 7 are each amended to read as follows:The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise.(1) "Board" means the governing body of a regional fire protection service authority.(2) "Elected official" means an elected official of a participating fire protection jurisdiction or a regional fire protection district commissioner created under RCW 52.26.080.(3) "Fire protection jurisdiction" means a fire district, regional fire protection service authority, city, town, port district, municipal airport, or Indian tribe.(4) "Participating fire protection jurisdiction" means a fire protection jurisdiction participating in the formation or operation of a regional fire protection service authority.(5) "Reasonable proximity" means geographical areas near enough to each other so that governance, management, and services can be delivered effectively.(6) "Regional fire protection service authority" or "authority" means a municipal corporation, an independent taxing authority within the meaning of Article VII, section 1 of the state Constitution, and a taxing district within the meaning of Article VII, section 2 of the state Constitution, whose boundaries are coextensive with two or more ((adjacent)) fire protection jurisdictions located within reasonable proximity and that has been created by a vote of the people under this chapter to implement a regional fire protection service authority plan.(((6))) (7) "Regional fire protection service authority plan" or "plan" means a plan to develop and finance a regional fire protection service authority project or projects including, but not limited to, specific capital projects, fire operations and emergency service operations pursuant to RCW 52.26.040(3)(b), and preservation and maintenance of existing or future facilities.(((7))) (8) "Regional fire protection service authority planning committee" or "planning committee" means the advisory committee created under RCW 52.26.030 to create and propose to fire protection jurisdictions a regional fire protection service authority plan to design, finance, and develop fire protection and emergency service projects.(((8))) (9) "Regular property taxes" has the same meaning as in RCW 84.04.140.Sec. 6. RCW84.04.140.Sec. 3. RCW 52.26.060 and 2006 c 200 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:The governing bodies of two or more ((adjacent)) fire protection jurisdictions located within reasonable proximity, upon receipt of the regional fire protection service authority plan under RCW 52.26.040, may certify the plan to the ballot, including identification of the revenue options specified to fund the plan.
The authority is liable for its proportionate share of the costs when the elections are held under RCW 29A.04.321 and 29A.04.330.Sec. 7. RCW29A.04.330.Sec. 4. RCW 52.26.300 and 2011 c 271 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:(1) A fire protection jurisdiction that is ((adjacent)) located within reasonable proximity to the boundary of a regional fire protection service authority is eligible for annexation by the authority.(2) An annexation is initiated by the adoption of a resolution by the governing body of a fire protection jurisdiction requesting the annexation.
View plain text versions (2)
- Bill View text Current html
- Substitute Substitute Bill html
Action History
-
Effective date 6/7/2018.
-
Chapter 28, 2018 Laws.
-
Governor signed.
-
Delivered to Governor.
-
President signed.
-
Speaker signed.
-
Third reading, passed; yeas, 48; nays, 1; absent, 0; excused, 0.
-
Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.
-
Placed on second reading by Rules Committee.
-
Passed to Rules Committee for second reading.
-
LGOV - Majority; do pass.
-
First reading, referred to Local Government.
-
Third reading, passed; yeas, 90; nays, 8; absent, 0; excused, 0.
-
Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.
-
1st substitute bill substituted.
-
1st substitute bill substituted.
-
Placed on second reading by Rules Committee.
-
Placed on second reading by Rules Committee.
-
Referred to Rules 2 Review.
-
Referred to Rules 2 Review.
-
Minority; do not pass.
-
LG - Majority; 1st substitute bill be substituted, do pass.
-
Minority; do not pass.
-
LG - Majority; 1st substitute bill be substituted, do pass.
-
First reading, referred to Local Government (Not Officially read and referred until adoption of Introduction report).
Sponsors
- Dan Griffey · Primary
- McBride · Cosponsor
- Larry Springer · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 2 co-sponsors · 148 not signed on · 5 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Dan Griffey Republican
Co-sponsors (2)
- McBride
- Larry Springer Democrat
Not signed on (148)
148 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 148 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democrat | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 48 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 98% | 2% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (49)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Angel | — | Yea |
| Baumgartner | — | Yea |
| Becker | — | Yea |
| Hawkins | — | Yea |
| Hobbs | — | Yea |
| O'Ban | — | Yea |
| Palumbo | — | Yea |
| Rivers | — | Yea |
| Rolfes | — | Yea |
| Sheldon | — | Yea |
| Brown | — | Yea |
| Wilson | — | Yea |
| Bailey | — | Yea |
| Billig | — | Yea |
| Carlyle | — | Yea |
| Darneille | — | Yea |
| Ericksen | — | Yea |
| Fain | — | Yea |
| Frockt | — | Yea |
| Honeyford | — | Yea |
| Keiser | — | Yea |
| Kuderer | — | Yea |
| McCoy | — | Yea |
| Miloscia | — | Yea |
| Mullet | — | Yea |
| Nelson | — | Yea |
| Padden | — | Yea |
| Ranker | — | Yea |
| Takko | — | Yea |
| Zeiger | — | Yea |
| Van De Wege | — | Yea |
| Annette Cleveland | Democrat | Yea |
| Bob Hasegawa | Democrat | Nay |
| Jamie Pedersen | Democrat | Yea |
| Lisa Wellman | Democrat | Yea |
| Manka Dhingra | Democrat | Yea |
| Marko Liias | Democrat | Yea |
| Rebecca Saldaña | Democrat | Yea |
| Steve Conway | Democrat | Yea |
| Victoria Hunt | Democrat | Yea |
| Curtis King | Republican | Yea |
| Jim Walsh | Republican | Yea |
| John Braun | Republican | Yea |
| Judy Warnick | Republican | Yea |
| Keith Wagoner | Republican | Yea |
| Mark Schoesler | Republican | Yea |
| Phil Fortunato | Republican | Yea |
| Rob Chase | Republican | Yea |
| Shelly Short | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 46 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 12 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Democrat | 32 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 90 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 92% | 8% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (98)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Appleton | — | Yea |
| Buys | — | Nay |
| Cody | — | Yea |
| Dolan | — | Yea |
| Graves | — | Yea |
| Haler | — | Yea |
| Harmsworth | — | Yea |
| Hayes | — | Yea |
| Muri | — | Yea |
| Nealey | — | Nay |
| Pettigrew | — | Yea |
| Pike | — | Yea |
| Rodne | — | Yea |
| Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Sells | — | Yea |
| Shea | — | Yea |
| Hargrove | — | Yea |
| Blake | — | Yea |
| Chandler | — | Yea |
| Chopp | — | Yea |
| Clibborn | — | Yea |
| Condotta | — | Yea |
| DeBolt | — | Yea |
| Hudgins | — | Yea |
| Irwin | — | Yea |
| Jenkin | — | Nay |
| Kagi | — | Yea |
| Kirby | — | Yea |
| Klippert | — | Yea |
| Kraft | — | Yea |
| Kretz | — | Yea |
| Kristiansen | — | Yea |
| Smith | — | Yea |
| Lytton | — | Yea |
| Manweller | — | Yea |
| Maycumber | — | Yea |
| McBride | — | Yea |
| McCaslin | — | Nay |
| McDonald | — | Yea |
| Morris | — | Yea |
| Mosbrucker | — | Yea |
| Pellicciotti | — | Yea |
| Stambaugh | — | Yea |
| Sullivan | — | Yea |
| Tarleton | — | Yea |
| Vick | — | Yea |
| Wilcox | — | Yea |
| Young | — | Yea |
| Johnson, J. | — | Yea |
| Van Werven | — | Yea |
| Beth Doglio | Democrat | Yea |
| Chris Kilduff | Democrat | Yea |
| Cindy Ryu | Democrat | Yea |
| Derek Stanford | Democrat | Yea |
| Drew Hansen | Democrat | Yea |
| Gerry Pollet | Democrat | Yea |
| Jake Fey | Democrat | Yea |
| Jamila Taylor | Democrat | Nay |
| Javier Valdez | Democrat | Yea |
| Joe Fitzgibbon | Democrat | Yea |
| John Lovick | Democrat | Yea |
| June Robinson | Democrat | Yea |
| Kristine Reeves | Democrat | Yea |
| Larry Springer | Democrat | Yea |
| Laurie Jinkins | Democrat | Yea |
| Lillian Ortiz-Self | Democrat | Yea |
| Marcus Riccelli | Democrat | Yea |
| Mia Gregerson | Democrat | Yea |
| Mike Chapman | Democrat | Yea |
| Monica Jurado Stonier | Democrat | Yea |
| Nicole Macri | Democrat | Yea |
| Noel Frame | Democrat | Yea |
| Roger Goodman | Democrat | Yea |
| Sharon Tomiko Santos | Democrat | Yea |
| Sharon Wylie | Democrat | Yea |
| Shelley Kloba | Democrat | Yea |
| Steve Bergquist | Democrat | Yea |
| Steve Tharinger | Democrat | Yea |
| Strom Peterson | Democrat | Yea |
| Tana Senn | Democrat | Yea |
| Timm Ormsby | Democrat | Yea |
| Tina Orwall | Democrat | Yea |
| Vandana Slatter | Democrat | Yea |
| Andrew Barkis | Republican | Yea |
| Carolyn Eslick | Republican | Yea |
| Dan Griffey | Republican | Yea |
| Drew MacEwen | Republican | Yea |
| Drew Stokesbary | Republican | Yea |
| Ed Orcutt | Republican | Nay |
| Jeff Holy | Republican | Yea |
| Jim Walsh | Republican | Yea |
| Joe Schmick | Republican | Nay |
| Mary Dye | Republican | Nay |
| Michelle Valdez | Republican | Yea |
| Mike Steele | Republican | Yea |
| Mike Volz | Republican | Yea |
| Paul Harris | Republican | Yea |
| Tom Dent | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- Who sponsors HB 2576?
- HB 2576 is sponsored by Dan Griffey (Republican), McBride, and Larry Springer (Democrat).
- What is the current status of HB 2576?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2018. Enacted.
- Where can I track HB 2576?
- Track HB 2576 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HB 2576
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of HB 2576
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →