Habitat mitigation grants

AN ACT Relating to requiring fairness in mitigation requirements; 1
amending RCW 79A.15.060; and creating a new section.2
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:3
NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. The preservation of critical species and 4
habitats is important in this state. However, it should not be done 5
at the cost of private landowners. When state regulations result in 6
the loss of the beneficial use of property, the legislature finds 7
that the state should provide compensation in order to preserve 8
habitats.9
Sec. 2. RCW 79A.15.060 and 2019 c 353 s 12 are each amended to 10
read as follows: 11
(1) The board may adopt rules establishing acquisition policies 12
and priorities for distributions from the habitat conservation 13
account. 14
(2) Except as provided in RCW 79A.15.030(8), moneys appropriated 15
for this chapter may not be used by the board to fund staff positions 16
or other overhead expenses, or by a state, regional, or local agency 17
to fund operation or maintenance of areas acquired under this 18
chapter. 19
S-3713.2
SENATE BILL 6075
State of Washington 69th Legislature 2026 Regular Session
By Senators Wagoner and Short
Read first time 01/13/26. Referred to Committee on Agriculture &
Natural Resources.
p. 1 SB 6075
(3) Moneys appropriated for this chapter may be used by grant 1
recipients for costs incidental to acquisition, including, but not 2
limited to, surveying expenses, fencing, noxious weed control, 3
mitigation costs, and signing. 4
(4) The board may not approve a local project where the local 5
agency share , including any fees received by the local agency from 6
private project permit applicants, is less than the amount to be 7
awarded from the habitat conservation account. 8
(5)(a) The habitat conservation account must also be available 9
for grants to landowners when the cost of mitigation requirements 10
required by the department of fish and wildlife or the department of 11
ecology exceeds the costs of a typical mitigation fee or of a 12
mitigation fee for an equivalent impact in the same region.13
(b) The account must also be available when mitigation 14
requirements deprive the landowner of the beneficial use of the real 15
property to such an extent that the deprivation results in the loss 16
of more than 50 percent of the financial benefit from the current use 17
of the property.18
(6) In determining acquisition priorities with respect to the 19
habitat conservation account, the board shall consider, at a minimum, 20
the following criteria: 21
(a) For critical habitat and natural areas proposals:22
(i) Multiple benefits for the project; 23
(ii) Whether, and the extent to which, a conservation easement 24
can be used to meet the purposes for the project; 25
(iii) Community support for the project based on input from, but 26
not limited to, local citizens, local organizations, and local 27
elected officials; 28
(iv) The project proposal's ongoing stewardship program that 29
includes estimated costs of maintaining and operating the project 30
including, but not limited to, control of noxious weeds and 31
detrimental invasive species, and that identifies the source of the 32
funds from which the stewardship program will be funded;33
(v) Recommendations as part of a watershed plan or habitat 34
conservation plan, or a coordinated regionwide prioritization effort, 35
and for projects primarily intended to benefit salmon, limiting 36
factors, or critical pathways analysis; 37
(vi) Immediacy of threat to the site; 38
(vii) Uniqueness of the site; 39
(viii) Diversity of species using the site; 40
p. 2 SB 6075
(ix) Quality of the habitat; 1
(x) Long-term viability of the site; 2
(xi) Presence of endangered, threatened, or sensitive species;3
(xii) Enhancement of existing public property; 4
(xiii) Consistency with a local land use plan, or a regional or 5
statewide recreational or resource plan, including projects that 6
assist in the implementation of local shoreline master plans updated 7
according to RCW 90.58.080 or local comprehensive plans updated 8
according to RCW 36.70A.130; 9
(xiv) Educational and scientific value of the site;10
(xv) Integration with recovery efforts for endangered, 11
threatened, or sensitive species; 12
(xvi) The statewide significance of the site; 13
(xvii) Habitat benefits for the feeding, nesting, and 14
reproduction of all pollinators, including honey bees.15
(b) For urban wildlife habitat proposals, in addition to the 16
criteria of (a) of this subsection: 17
(i) Population of, and distance from, the nearest urban area;18
(ii) Proximity to other wildlife habitat; 19
(iii) Potential for public use; and 20
(iv) Potential for use by special needs populations.21
(c) For riparian protection proposals, the board must consider, 22
at a minimum, the following criteria: 23
(i) Whether the project continues the conservation reserve 24
enhancement program. Applications that extend the duration of leases 25
of riparian areas that are currently enrolled in the conservation 26
reserve enhancement program are eligible. These applications are 27
eligible for a conservation lease extension of at least twenty-five 28
years of duration; 29
(ii) Whether the projects are identified or recommended in a 30
watershed plan, salmon recovery plan, or other local plans, such as 31
habitat conservation plans, and these must be highly considered in 32
the process; 33
(iii) Whether there is community support for the project;34
(iv) Whether the proposal includes an ongoing stewardship program 35
that includes control of noxious weeds, detrimental invasive species, 36
and that identifies the source of the funds from which the 37
stewardship program will be funded; 38
(v) Whether there is an immediate threat to the site;39
p. 3 SB 6075
(vi) Whether the quality of the habitat is improved or, for 1
projects including restoration or enhancement, the potential for 2
restoring quality habitat including linkage of the site to other high 3
quality habitat; 4
(vii) Whether the project is consistent with a local land use 5
plan or a regional or statewide recreational or resource plan. The 6
projects that assist in the implementation of local shoreline master 7
plans updated according to RCW 90.58.080 or local comprehensive plans 8
updated according to RCW 36.70A.130 must be highly considered in the 9
process; 10
(viii) Whether the site has educational or scientific value;11
(ix) Whether the site has passive recreational values for walking 12
trails, wildlife viewing, the observation of natural settings, or 13
other multiple benefits; and 14
(x) Whether the project provides habitat benefits for the 15
feeding, nesting, and reproduction of all pollinators, including 16
honey bees. 17
(d) Moneys appropriated for this chapter to riparian protection 18
projects must be distributed for the acquisition or enhancement or 19
restoration of riparian habitat. All enhancement or restoration 20
projects, except those qualifying under (c)(i) of this subsection, 21
must include the acquisition of a real property interest in order to 22
be eligible. 23
(((6))) (7) Before November 1st of each even-numbered year, the 24
board shall recommend to the governor a prioritized list of all 25
projects to be funded under RCW 79A.15.040. The governor may remove 26
projects from the list recommended by the board and shall submit this 27
amended list in the capital budget request to the legislature. The 28
list shall include, but not be limited to, a description of each 29
project and any particular match requirement, and describe for each 30
project any anticipated restrictions upon recreational activities 31
allowed prior to the project. 32
--- END ---
p. 4 SB 6075