Climate Action This Week: 
  • Strengthen Recycling, Reduce Waste
  • Oppose Harmful Reforestation 
  • Expand Higher Density Housing
  • Oppose Lower Standards for Police Vehicular Pursuits
  • Energy Codes
  • Business Emissions Reductions 
  • Targeted Electrification 
  • Green Amendment to Washington State’s Constitution
Thanks for taking action with us!

If you're viewing this on a smartphone, make sure you're in your browser.

Question Title

* Your information

Here are our top 3 actions. We think they will take 15 minutes.

Question Title

* 📜 1. Renewing Washington's recycling system and reducing waste - SB 5697

Also known as the RENEW Recycling Act, this bill would make producers of packaging and paper products responsible for their products’ full lifecycle and incentivize them to improve by establishing graduated fees based on how readily the packaging can be reused, recycled, or composted.

The fees raised will be used to fund improvements in infrastructure, provide uniform recycling access for residents across the state, and communicate a clear list of what people can and can’t recycle.  

We are following the lead of Zero Waste Washington on this bill.

Scheduled for a public hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology on Tuesday, January 18, 10:30 AM. 

✏️ Please sign in here to support SB 5697 before Tuesday, January 18, 9:30 AM and select “Pro” in the position button.

Question Title

* 📜 2. Developing a plan for conservation, reforestation, and restoration of forests in Washington state - HB 1895

We're opposing this bill. Announced by the Department of Natural Resources as “Keep Washington Evergreen,” this bill would direct the agency to develop plans to conserve, reforest and restore three million acres of forest land.

Because this proposal focuses on the preservation of monoculture working forest land rather than setting aside legacy forest land for long term carbon sequestration and ecological benefits, we are opposing the bill.

We are following the lead of the Pacific Northwest Forest Climate Alliance on this bill.

Scheduled for a public hearing in the House Committee on Rural Development, Agriculture & Natural Resources on Tuesday, January 18, 10:00 AM. 

✏️ Follow this link to provide a written comment before Wednesday, January 19, 10:00 AM and select “Con” in the position button. Written testimony will close 24 hours after the start time of the hearing.

“Position” - please select “Con”. The first sentence of the written comment should be: I strongly oppose HB 1895.

📑 Then choose 1-2 additional sentences from the options below or feel free to write your own.
  • Currently this bill emphasizes the preservation of monoculture working forests over natural forests. That is exactly backwards compared to what we need. 
  • Working forests are a form of deforestation that involves building roads, clearing trees, burning slash piles, and poisoning the land with pesticides. 
  • “Managed replanting” results in a monoculture of thirsty, sickly trees that ruins ecological biodiversity, dries out the land and removes Tribal access to traditional plant gathering and hunting. We need to preserve natural, legacy forests.
  • Working forests damage local communities with boom-and-bust logging cycles, unhealthy working conditions, and fewer jobs resulting from increased mechanization. 
  • The legacy forests of the Pacific Northwest have the best potential for carbon sequestration. It is time to abandon the false science used by the timber industry to justify shorter logging cycles and plantation forests.

Question Title

* 📜 3. Creating additional middle housing near transit and in areas traditionally dedicated to single-family detached housing - HB 1782 and SB 5670

This set of identical bills would create additional “middle” (higher density) housing near transit and in areas traditionally dedicated to single-family detached housing. In cities over 10,000 residents, the zoning would allow duplexes in all residential zones and in cities over 20,000, the bill would allow for four-plexes. Any area in a city that is identified as a “high-capacity” transit zone (i.e., within half a mile of a major transit stop) would allow even greater density such as six-plexes or courtyard apartments. 

Washington’s zoning laws disproportionately hurt communities of color, who have been historically harmed by redlining and are more likely to be renters. This bill would not only help correct this historic injustice, but also would relieve the root cause of our housing crisis: a shortage of homes. And more middle housing means more affordable home choices near jobs, schools, and transit, as well as more options for first-time homebuyers.  

We are following the lead of Sightline and Futurewise on these bills.

Both the Senate and the House are holding hearings this week.

SB 5670 is scheduled for a public hearing in the Senate Committee for Housing & Local Government on Tuesday, January 18, 8:00 AM.

✏️ Please sign in here to support SB 5670 before Tuesday, January 18, 7:00 AM and select “Pro” in the position button.

HB 1782 is scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Local Government on Tuesday, January 18, 10:00 AM.

✏️ Please sign in here to support HB 1782 before Tuesday, January 18, 9:00 AM and select “Pro” in the position button.

All done? Don’t forget to scroll to the bottom and click the orange “DONE” button to submit your actions!
Have 10 more minutes? Here's three more for you!

Question Title

* 📜 4. Vehicular Pursuits - HB 1788

We’re opposing this bill. This bill would change the current strict “probable cause” standard for allowing police to engage in a high-speed vehicular pursuit. Police would only need to have “reasonable suspicion” that a criminal offense has been committed and that the risks of not apprehending or identifying the suspect outweigh the risks of pursuit. This change would significantly weaken the safeguards put in place by the legislature last year and increase the risk of racial profiling. Vehicular pursuits are extremely dangerous; this bill would put all drivers, pedestrians, passengers, and law enforcement at greater risk of injury or death, not just the target. 

We are following the lead of the Washington Coalition for Police Accountability on this bill.

Scheduled for a public hearing in the House Committee on Public Safety on Tuesday, January 18, 8:00 AM. 

✏️ Please sign in here to oppose HB 1788 before Tuesday, January 18, 7:00 AM and select “Con” in the position button.

Question Title

* 📜 5. Strengthening energy codes - HB 1770

This bill would create a residential reach code for local jurisdictions and a net-zero ready deadline for new construction by 2030. Local jurisdictions in Washington state are currently restricted from passing residential energy codes that are stronger than the state code set every three years by the State Building Code Council (SBCC). To address this problem, this bill and the identical Senate version would require the SBCC to develop an optional residential reach code for energy use and efficiency in new single-family and small multi-family buildings.

Strong energy codes signal to manufacturers that demand will be consistent; they drive technology innovation and reduce costs. This will help lower greenhouse gas emissions and improve the air quality both inside and out, particularly for lower income communities.

We are following the lead of Shift Zero on this bill.

Scheduled for a public hearing in the House Committee on Local Government on Wednesday, January 19, 10:00 AM. 

✏️ Please sign in here to support HB 1770 before Wednesday, January 19, 9:00 AM and select “Pro” in the position button.

Question Title

* 📜 6. Business Emissions Reductions - HB 1682

Emissions-Intensive, Trade-Exposed businesses (“EITE”) facilities are core industries, primarily manufacturing, that release large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions and face significant national or global competition for their products. The 2021 Climate Commitment Act (CCA) required the legislature to define the schedule and pace of EITEs’ emissions reductions (“compliance pathway”) for achieving their proportionate share of the state's emissions reductions from 2035 through 2050.

We have some concerns about the bill.

Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Environment & Energy on Tuesday, January 18, 8:00 AM. 

✏️ Follow this link to provide a written comment on HB 1682 before Wednesday, January 19, 8:00 AM and select “Other” in the position button. 

“Position” - please select “Other”. The first sentence of the written comment should be: I wish to comment on HB 1682.

📑 Then choose 1-2 additional sentences from the options below or feel free to write your own.
  • The Department of Ecology requested a steeper, faster reduction of free emission allowances allocated to EITEs than this bill contains. What is the rationale for the slower path of emission reductions in the current bill?
  • If criteria co-pollutants match a facility’s emissions of greenhouse gasses, a faster ramp-down of emissions would benefit overburdened frontline communities.
  • Governor Inslee has proposed $50M in grants to large polluters to help them start lowering their greenhouse gas emissions. Will the public be able to follow the application and approval process? What criteria will be used to award the grants?
  • Some climate watch dogs argue that EITEs have sufficient time to retool during the first two compliance periods of the CCA (2023-2034) and should have their percentage of emissions drop to 50% immediately in 2035, and continue to drop year to year after 2035. They argue this would ensure that our program achieves measurable effects ahead of the proposed linkage with the California system, which is awash with low cost allowances.

All done? Don’t forget to scroll to the bottom and click the orange “DONE” button to submit your actions!
For those with more time, we have two more for you!

Question Title

* 📜 7. Targeted Electrification - SB 5666

This is the companion bill to HB 1767 and we’re tracking both bills closely. Like HB 1767, this bill would allow Public Utility Districts and municipal utilities to promote fuel switching from fossil fuels to electricity. Investor-owned utilities, like Puget Sound Energy and Avista, and co-ops already have the authority to help their customers convert equipment. This legislation creates consistency for all customers in the state by granting the same authority to consumer-owned utilities.

We’re following the lead of Shift Zero on this bill. 

Scheduled for a public hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology on Wednesday, January 19, 8:00 AM. 

✏️ Please sign in here to support SB 5666 before Wednesday, January 19, 7:00 AM and select “Pro” in the position button.

Question Title

* 📜 8. Adding a new section to the Washington state Constitution regarding the conservation and protection of the state's natural resources - SJR 8210 and HJR 4209

These bills, unofficially known as the “Green Amendment” would amend the state Constitution to provide that the people of the state have the right to a clean and healthy environment, that the state shall serve as trustee of the natural resources of the state, and that the state shall equitably protect these rights for all people.

We’re concerned that these bills have not yet been scheduled.

We’re following the lead of 350 WA and Green Amendments for the Generations on these bills.

✏️ Follow this link to ask your representatives to support this amendment and follow this link to ask your senator to support it. 

The first sentence of the written comment should be: I strongly support this Joint Resolution to amend the Washington State Constitution.

📑 Then choose 1-2 additional sentences from the options below or feel free to write your own.
  • I urge you to let the Chair of your chamber's Environment Committee know that your constituents are asking for this Joint Resolution to have a hearing. 
  • The people of the state, including future generations, have the right to a clean and healthy environment, including pure water, clean air, healthy ecosystems, and a stable climate. 
  • The rights stated in this section are inherent, inalienable, and indefeasible, and are among those rights reserved to all the people.
  • These rights are on par with other protected inalienable rights.

Question Title

* Thanks for hanging in there with us - that was a lot of work! How did that go?

-- The 350 WA Civic Action Team

P.S. Not on the CAT email list? Sign up here!

T