Thanks to everyone that made it out to a great ribbon cutting at The Towns on Elm! You can check them out at 212 N. Elm St., Kennewick, WA 99336

​Affordable housing is a growing problem in Washington. When workers cannot afford to live near their jobs, employers struggle to hire and retain employees, and communities experience increased pressure on roads, services, and growth. Inclusionary zoning offers one way for local governments to tackle this issue by requiring or encouraging developers to include affordable homes in new residential projects.

In Washington, inclusionary zoning can be either voluntary or mandatory. Voluntary programs offer benefits such as increased density, reduced parking requirements, fee waivers, or faster permit reviews in exchange for affordable units. Mandatory programs require affordable housing in specific developments, often in areas where additional housing capacity has already been approved. Some programs also allow developers to pay a fee instead of building the units on-site.

State law provides the foundation for these programs. Under RCW 36.70A.540, cities and counties planning under the Growth Management Act can create affordable housing incentive programs. Usually, rental units must serve households earning up to 50 percent of the county median income, while ownership units must accommodate households earning up to 80 percent. These units are required to stay affordable for at least 50 years.

Several cities in Washington, including Redmond, Bellevue, Kirkland, Tacoma, Sammamish, Bothell, Issaquah, Kenmore, Marysville, and Federal Way, have adopted this approach. Their programs demonstrate that inclusionary zoning can be tailored to meet local needs and housing market conditions.

However, this isn’t an easy solution. Inclusionary zoning generally works best in strong housing markets where development stays financially feasible. If requirements are too strict, they can hinder new construction. That’s why local governments need to carefully design these programs and find a balance between affordability goals and market conditions.
​
For businesses, this issue is important because housing impacts workforce stability, commuting patterns, and long-term economic growth. When implemented effectively, inclusionary zoning can help communities expand their housing options while strengthening the local economy.

Thanks to all who came to our Legislative Wrap-Up Luncheon on 4/22!

Washington’s sales tax system may seem simple, but the money collected from each sale is divided among different levels of government. For businesses, the main point is clear: sales tax rates are not just numbers on a receipt. They reflect state and local policy choices that can influence compliance, business operations, and the overall cost of doing business in Washington.

The state receives 6.5 percent of the retail sales tax. Additionally, local governments receive an additional share under a structure determined by state law. Since these local taxes are coordinated across cities, towns, and counties, they don't simply add up within the same jurisdiction. That’s why Washington’s minimum combined sales tax rate starts at 7.5 percent.

Rates above that level usually result from additional local taxes approved for specific purposes such as transportation, public safety, criminal justice, housing, behavioral health, and public facilities. Transit districts and other special-purpose districts might also add their own sales tax components. Consequently, rates can differ significantly from one city to another.

That matters for businesses, especially those with multiple locations or customers in different jurisdictions. In areas like the Tri-Cities, local rate differences can reflect investments in transit, public safety, and community amenities. For business owners, sales tax isn't just a compliance issue; it also demonstrates how local communities fund services and infrastructure that support growth and commerce.

The main point is that Washington’s sales tax system acts both as a source of revenue and as a reflection of public policy. Understanding how these components work can help businesses stay compliant, plan more effectively, and better evaluate the markets in which they operate.
​
For a deeper review of the topic, readers can return to the original article, MRSC - Where Do Our Sales Taxes Go?

Thanks to everyone who joined us for a beautiful, sunny, business after hours with Water2Wine Cruises! ​

​Eminent domain is one of the government’s most powerful tools because it allows the government to take private property for public projects. In Washington, the goal is to balance two important principles: strong property rights and the need to build roads, utilities, and other public infrastructure. The rules are clear: the project must serve a true public purpose, the owner must receive fair compensation, and the process must go through the courts.

Eminent domain is the government’s power to take private property for public use. The legal process is called condemnation, which may involve taking all or part of a property, or just a limited right like an easement. Washington courts do not simply rely on a government label; they must be able to determine that the use is genuinely public.

Washington’s Constitution imposes strict limits. It generally prohibits takings for private use, with narrow exceptions such as private ways of necessity and certain drainage or ditch work for agricultural, domestic, or sanitary purposes. It also requires that compensation be paid in advance or deposited into court for the owner, and it makes whether a use is public a question for the courts to decide.

Most of the time in Washington, eminent domain has been used for essential public infrastructure such as streets, highways, bridges, water systems, sewer and drainage systems, parks, and public buildings. These purposes are detailed in state law. The biggest controversies usually occur when eminent domain is connected to redevelopment or “economic development,” especially after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Kelo decision in 2005 raised concerns nationwide about taking property for projects that mainly benefit private parties.

In real life, local government usually starts with a specific project and a formal decision by the council or commission. They try to buy the property first. If negotiations fail, the government files a case in superior court. The judge first decides whether the project is for public use and necessary, then the court process determines compensation. Washington also has relocation assistance rules to reduce hardship for people or businesses displaced by public projects.
​
For businesses and communities, the benefit of eminent domain is that it can enable projects that help everyone, such as safer roads, utility upgrades, flood control, and freight access improvements. The drawback is disruption: forced relocation, construction disruptions, loss of customer access, and uncertainty near the project site. People in Washington generally support eminent domain when the public purpose is clear and limited but distrust it when they believe it might benefit a private interest. The best safeguard is a careful, transparent process that considers condemnation only as a last resort.

• Washington State Legislature. “Washington Constitution, Article I, Section 16: Eminent Domain.”
• Washington State Legislature. “RCW 8.12.030: Condemnation authorized, purposes (cities and towns).”
• Washington State Legislature. “RCW 8.08.010: Condemnation authorized for general county purposes, petition.”
• Washington State Legislature. “Chapter 8.26 RCW: Relocation assistance for persons displaced by public projects.”
• MRSC. “Eminent Domain (Washington overview and resources).”
• MRSC. “Eminent Domain: The Basics (Washington State Association of Municipal Attorneys conference paper).”
• Institute for Justice. “The Potential for Eminent Domain Abuse in Washington (policy brief).”
• Pierce County Charter. “§ 9.80 Eminent Domain.”
• Washington State Attorney General's Office. “Property owners and politicians request limits to land grabs (news release).”
• Library of Congress. “U.S. Reports: Kelo v. New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005).”
• Seattle Post-Intelligencer. “Condemnation for eminent domain (commentary reflecting public concerns).”

 This article was written with contributions from AI to organize the information and improve its readability.

​In Part 1, we described what a Transportation Benefit District is, how it can generate funds, and why cities and counties use it to support local transportation needs. Now, we will focus on how these districts can impact daily life.

TBDs can enhance roads, sidewalks, and safety, but they also depend on taxes and fees paid by people and businesses. Knowing both perspectives helps communities decide if a TBD is worthwhile and how to create it effectively.

What TBDs mean for businesses and local communities

For businesses, transportation is closely tied to costs and customer access. Properly maintained roads can reduce vehicle damage and prevent delivery delays. Safe sidewalks and crossings can increase foot traffic, especially in downtown areas and near shopping districts. Better intersections can decrease congestion that slows down employees, customers, and freight.

For local communities, TBD investments can quickly improve safety and accessibility. Fixing sidewalks, ADA curb ramps, safer crossings near schools, and better traffic signals help seniors, students, and people with disabilities travel more confidently. When projects are chosen carefully, they can also strengthen neighborhood ties and boost local economic activity.

Potential positive effects for Washington residents and businesses

TBDs can provide benefits that build over time.

Regular road maintenance helps prevent street failures, which lowers long-term costs. Safety investments can reduce serious crashes and make travel easier and less stressful. Transportation upgrades can also attract more business districts by providing better access, improved walking conditions, and smoother vehicle flow.

Another benefit is local control. A community can allocate funding to the streets and corridors that matter most to local residents and employers. TBD funding can also help a city or county compete for state and federal grants by providing a local match.

Potential negative effects and common concerns

Even small taxes and fees can be a burden.

Vehicle fees increase the annual cost of registration. Flat fees can burden households and small businesses because the amount stays the same regardless of income. Sales taxes can also raise fairness concerns because they take a larger share of income from lower-income households than from higher-income households.

Some businesses might face a greater impact than others. Companies with fleets, including contractors and service providers, could pay more because of multiple vehicle registrations. Retailers might worry that higher sales tax rates could affect customer spending, especially in areas near city borders where shoppers can choose where to buy.

Another common issue is trust. People want assurance that the money is used as promised. Reporting requirements help, but clear project lists, regular public updates, and measurable outcomes are essential for community confidence.

Finally, there are fairness concerns with district boundaries. Residents within the district pay the vehicle fee, while those who drive in from outside might benefit from better streets without paying the fee. Meanwhile, a sales tax can generate revenue from visitors who shop in the district, not just locals.

Transportation Benefit Districts are crucial tools that Washington communities use to finance local transportation projects. As Part 1 explained, they are meant to provide a dedicated funding source for streets, sidewalks, safety upgrades, and related services. Part 2 covers why this tool can be both helpful and controversial.

On the positive side, TBDs can facilitate smoother streets, safer crossings, better access to business districts, and more reliable transportation systems. These improvements can support local jobs and improve quality of life. On the challenging side, TBDs rely on taxes and fees that affect household budgets and business expenses, and they may raise concerns about fairness and equity if not implemented carefully.
​
The main point is that TBDs work best when communities are clear about what the money will fund, choose projects that solve everyday problems, report results openly, and consider who pays and benefits. When these elements are in place, a TBD can be an effective way to protect infrastructure, support local businesses, and keep Washington communities moving.