Guest opinion: Impact of Hirst decision must be addressed

In Washington state, the legislative stalemate over permitting new household wells and the state’s construction budget has not only delayed needed funding for public projects, but triggered yet another salvo in the wider conflict over future supplies of fresh water for people, fish and farms.

At immediate risk is $4.2 billion in state funding for local water and sewer projects, school construction, mental-health facilities, colleges and universities and other construction.

While there is general agreement between Democrats controlling the House and the coalition of mostly Republicans in charge of the Senate on the budget, there are substantial differences over how or whether to fix a water dispute called the “Hirst Decision.”

The stakes are too high for the legislature to ignore.

Republican Sen. Jim Honeyford of Grandview, chair of the capital budget, told the Seattle Times last July that the court decision has stopped home construction in rural areas. Holding up the capital budget is leverage to drive legislative changes.

Hirst refers to a 2016 Washington State Supreme Court decision restricting what are called “exempt wells” which are common in rural area home construction. Before the Hirst verdict, if a new well drew less than 5,000 gallons per day for domestic use, it was exempt from water right law and a building permit was issued.

However, under Hirst, the court ruled counties must protect senior water right holders and required them to independently (of state agencies) verify that water is “physically and legally available” for those with senior water rights. That assurance would be necessary before the construction permit could be issued.

Tribes, municipalities, farmers and water-dependent industrial plants are among those with senior water rights. Tribes and environmental groups are pressuring Democrats and Gov. Jay Inslee to oppose legislative efforts to overturn the court decision. They want independent hydrological studies even though county officials claim they can’t afford them.

The Building Industry Association of Washington described the Hirst decision as a major blow to residential development in Washington’s counties requiring legislative correction. The ruling effectively limits the use of new domestic wells in certain rural areas especially in high population growth areas such as Bellingham.

While the Hirst decision itself only directly applies to Whatcom County, the building association believes it sets a precedent for all counties. Association officials argue those rules were not intended to regulate permit-exempt water uses.

In the aftermath of Hirst, some counties temporarily suspended rural development, while others changed the criteria for obtaining building permits, the Seattle Times reported.

The Building Industry Association of Washington just released an economic study and pegged the loss in economic activity stemming from Hirst to be $6.9 billion a year predominantly in rural areas.

The builders added that $452.3 million in lost wages and nearly 9,300 lost jobs.

The lost property values from the court decision were estimated at $37 billion and researchers found $346 million in property taxes would be shifted to other properties in the state.

Some fear Hirst could even impact property owners with existing exempt wells and hydrologic studies could be required to prove those wells were not impeding senior water rights.

Republican Sen. Judy Warnick of Moses Lake offered legislation which she believed would protect those with senior water rights. House Democrats countered with an 18-month implementation delay accompanied by a study.

The bottom line is the economic impacts and hardship on property owners should make it impossible for lawmakers to ignore.

We are likely to see more of these conflicts arise as our state’s population climbs. It is now 7.3 million. The families and property owners impacted by Hirst, cannot be overlooked or dismissed.

Hirst sets an important precedent. Getting it right is important.

Don C. Brunell is a business analyst, writer and columnist. He retired as president of the Association of Washington Business, the state’s oldest and largest business organization, and now lives in Vancouver. He can be contacted at theBrunells@msn.com.

More in Opinion

Water Matters: A team effort

There’s an award-winning team of folks that’s been working behind the scenes… Continue reading

A plea to vote

U.S. Air Force veteran Larry Smith takes to the streets of Sequim… Continue reading

Guest opinion: Paid postage designed to boost voter turnout

Even with the postage paid, thousands of Washington state voters didn’t get… Continue reading

Odds and ends from the editor’s desk

Well, school is back in session, teachers have new contracts and all… Continue reading

Think About It: You’re only old once

I thought it was funny. I thought it would amuse these two… Continue reading

Guest opinion: Access to rural healthcare in Clallam County is under attack … again

In 2015, Congress voted in favor of bipartisan legislation to protect existing… Continue reading

From the Back Nine: Pint-size pirates

I have nothing against children. I think the little germ factories should… Continue reading

Guest column: Celebrating teachers

I interrupt my usual column schedule with an announcement! I can’t really… Continue reading

Guest opinion: Trade wars hit state’s cherry growers hard

Last April, Washington wheat, apple and cherry growers hoped U.S. and China… Continue reading

Think About It: Smoke gets in your lungs

Smoke in your lungs, your eyes, nose, throat is all bad. Nothing… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — Aug. 29, 2018

On Sunday, July 8, Tarot the cats’ lifeless body was found in… Continue reading

Guest column: Dungeness River Management Team approaches watershed health from many angles

Save the dates: 2018 Dungeness River Festival Community Night, River Festival The… Continue reading