MBAKS has released a new middle housing issue brief to support successful implementation of House Bill 1110. The new brief, Middle Housing Implementation Plan, contains process and model code recommendations for cities subject to HB 1110, as well as tools and resources related to middle housing.

MBAKS’ overarching suggestion for cities implementing middle housing is to keep it simple. The easier and more cost-effective it is to build middle housing, the more likely it is to be built, and the more attainable it will be for those looking for a place to call home. The recommendations in the issue brief were informed by the work of MBAKS’ Ad Hoc Middle Housing Advisory Group and are designed to streamline the review process and facilitate more housing choices.

Allowing more middle housing will enable cities to better plan for a spectrum of housing choices so that current residents, newcomers, and future generations may find a home that best fits their lives. View Middle Housing Implementation Plan.

Contact:
Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties
p 425.478.7453
pr@mbaks.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

INITIATIVE 24-03 CHALLENGED IN COURT ON LEGAL, COMMUNITY CONCERNS

Local initiative authorizes lawsuits for damages against any party that impacts Snohomish River Watershed, with lessened burdens of proof; requires City of Everett to complete undefined restoration activities with monetary judgments.

State Supreme Court precedent illustrates that the initiative falls outside of the scope of local initiative powers, as demonstrated by the Court invalidating a similar initiative passed in Spokane in 2016.

In filing the complaint, home builders and other local businesses underscored the importance of existing environmental laws to protect water quality in our region.

EVERETT, Wash., January 28, 2025–Today the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties, along with additional local businesses operating in Everett and Snohomish County, filed a complaint in Snohomish County Superior Court challenging the constitutionality of Initiative 24-03. The basis of the complaint is that the initiative’s scope falls outside of the legal parameters set for local initiatives in Washington State. A similar initiative passed in Spokane was invalidated by the State Supreme Court. The coalition of Plaintiffs that filed the complaint share the desire of Everett voters to protect our region’s waterways and green spaces. This is why they are proud to adhere to the strict requirements set by local and state agencies to protect water quality in our region, in addition to advancing other environmental stewardship measures under their respective corporate policies.

In 2016, the State Supreme Court found in Spokane Entrepreneurial Ctr. v. Spokane Moves to Amend the Constitution that initiatives such as I 24-03 fall outside the scope of local initiative powers. A member of the legal team that successfully argued for the plaintiffs in that case is serving as lead counsel on this complaint, Rob Maguire of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP.

“Washington Courts have consistently rejected local initiatives seeking to change water use or regulation as beyond the scope of the local initiative power,” said Mr. Maguire. “Like the Spokane initiative that was unanimously struck down by our State Supreme Court, the Everett initiative seeks to change water use regulations over the Snohomish River Watershed, including its tributaries. It goes far beyond the scope of the local initiative power because it conflicts with federal and state law, and is unconstitutionally vague. We are therefore asking the court to invalidate the initiative and enter an injunction preventing the unlawful measure from being enacted or enforced.”

Clayton Graham, a land use lawyer at Davis Wright Tremaine and co-counsel to the Plaintiffs, noted that “[t]he Initiative, if enacted and enforced, would leave owners, users, and developers of property in Everett in a lurch; given the possibility of damages suits for activities that have virtually any impact—no matter how minor or indirect—on the Snohomish River Watershed.” Mr. Graham noted concerns about the “chilling effect” these liability provisions could have on development in the City, which is already subject federal, state, and local regulations intended to protect water quality.

“As homebuilders, our members are proud of their role in upholding our community’s investments and expectations for protecting the environment that we all share,” said Jerry Hall, executive director of the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties. “We cannot afford for the existing environmental regulations enforced by state and local jurisdictions to be undermined by the type of local initiative that our State Supreme Court has already found to be illegal. We are challenging this initiative in court so that local homebuilding may continue to help mitigate our region’s affordability crisis while new housing is built in accordance with existing, rigorous environmental protections. Furthermore, to the extent the initiative adversely affects housing construction and local businesses, it will inhibit the city of Everett’s efforts to accommodate the 20-year projections it is required to plan for under the Growth Management Act.”

“Our members operate under strict and appropriate regulatory oversight to ensure that their business operations are in alignment with our state’s values of environmental stewardship,” said Cory LeeAnn Shaw, executive director of the Washington Aggregates & Concrete Association. “Unfortunately, this illegal initiative runs counter to the existing environmental protections that require regular monitoring, permitting and compliance.”

Under the laws governing local initiatives, City of Everett officials acted in accordance with their obligations to put Initiative 24.03 before voters once the required number of signatures had been verified. Under the law, whether the content of the initiative complies with local initiative powers is not a factor in determining if it may be placed before voters. As a result, the initiative appeared on the ballot in Everett and following the election, plaintiffs are now asking Snohomish County Superior Court to intervene so that an unconstitutional initiative does not proceed further.

 Read the the full complaint here.

About MBAKS

The Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties (MBAKS) is the nation’s oldest and largest local homebuilders association, helping to make home happen since 1909. 

###

Spoiler: It's the top 10 green neighborhoods list. Georgetown is number eight.

Apologies for the clickbaity title. You should know that we would never make you click through twenty pages only to find a mediocre surprise at the end of the journey.

Back on topic, this is actually pretty cool for Georgetown, the area formerly known for satisfactorily dingy bars, burgers, and a weird smell probably produced by a mixture of said beer and burgers with a hint of airline fuel.

Redfin found that 56 percent of Georgetown homes were considered green, meaning they had one or more green features.

The study, conducted by Redfin data scientists, analyzed real estate listings for homes sold between January 2017 and April 2018 in more than 80 metro areas. The study also found that homes with the aforementioned one or more green features sold at significantly higher rates than those boring old techless homes—green had a median price of $569,000, compared to $522,000 for all other homes. That's…like a $47,000 difference. Right? Yes.

Numbers one and two on the list were, surprisingly, in Cleveland—the Malvern and Fenway neighborhoods in the upscale Shaker Heights neighborhood known for its sustainability efforts, among other things.

Neighborhoods in Philly, Orange County (CA), and the hipster haven Red Hook area of Brooklyn rounded out the list.

What does this mean for Georgetown? Nothing much more than a brag piece. It does, however, bring to light the fact that our builders and residents are trying. And that means something. Built Green, which certifies green homes in King and Snohomish counties and advocates for sustainability, can likely take some credit for Georgetown's number eight spot; last year, the partner program of MBAKS certified more than 800 new homes, which isn't easy to accomplish. Homes must adhere to vigorous checklists to be considered Built Green.

Says Built Green Program Manager Leah Missik, "Building green is about more than the gadgets that go into a home. (Programs like) Built Green work hard to promote healthy, sustainable communities in a variety of ways." Missik and Built Green are proud to lead by example both locally and at a national level. In fact, Missik says, "Each individual (Built Green) home is more water and energy efficient, healthier, and more comfortable, but our checklist also promotes walkability, access to transit, and community resources."

Missik drives home the importance of all-encompassing, sustainable communities like Georgetown and those others on the list, saying, "Homes are, after all, part of a community through the people who live in them!"

It's no secret that in progressive cities like Seattle and its surrounding areas that green is quickly becoming the new gold. People pay more for healthier, more sustainable homes and builders know this. Money has always talked, but when you attend a Built Green event, you quickly realize the people involved in green building also walk the walk. It's about more than higher home prices, which are already doing just fine in our area. It's about building a healthier future for our kids, and their kids, and so on.

Congratulations on being green, Georgetown. We'd buy you a beer, but you probably already have that covered.