|
Legislative committee
approves motion for
detailed analysis of proposed building code changes
Kristiansen,
Kretz make case for impact statements before changes are affirmed
The Joint Administrative
Rules Review Committee (JARRC) voted unanimously Thursday to require the
Washington State Building Code Council (SBCC) provide specific details
of the costs and economic impacts of proposed changes to the state's
building code.
The rare meeting was
prompted by JARCC members Reps. Dan Kristiansen and Joel Kretz, who
expressed concerns that the SBCC did not adequately spell out potential
costs and job losses to those who could be impacted by the increased
regulations.
"It's been estimated that
more than 15 thousand employers are going to be potentially affected by
these rules. We need to have a more rigorous and accurate estimate of
how these new codes would affect jobs and employers before we move
forward," said Kristiansen,
who serves as
House Republican Caucus chairman and is a former small-business owner in
the construction industry.
Kristiansen and Kretz contend the Legislature set implementation parameters this year
when it passed Senate Bill 5854. The measure incrementally increases energy efficiency codes for buildings, beginning in 2013, with the goal
of a 70 percent reduction in energy consumption by 2031. In direct
conflict with the law, the governor directed the SBCC to move the
timeline up to require a 30 percent reduction in energy consumption for
buildings by 2010.
A
cursory small business impact statement provided by the SBCC noted that
"the number of jobs created or lost as a result of compliance with the
proposed rule is unknown."
Kretz said it's unacceptable to advance such heavy-hitting and costly regulations
without knowing the impacts to employers and jobs.
"There were a lot of questions in the Legislature on the timetable of
moving forward with the code changes. Unanswered questions were the reason
the timeline in the bill was pushed
out to 2013. Questions such as: Are the energy savings and cost-benefits
accurate? Does it make sense in this economy? Do we know the job impact? Could this
impact potential financing for projects? All those things were
concerns," said Kretz, R-Wauconda. "This analysis cannot be business as
usual. It needs to be more rigorous and require a higher standard."
The SBCC report also noted that the proposed code changes would result
in less than a quarter percent change of cost for many of the
modifications. Kristiansen said he believes the council low-balled those
figures, which were based on theory from code change proponents, not
from builders or suppliers.
"The people I've talked to about these costs, who are out there providing
the materials, found it laughable and not even close to reality.
I still think the goals
of energy reduction are laudable. However, I want to make sure it's not
going to cost me 30 percent in building expenses to save 15 percent on
an energy bill,"
noted Kristiansen, R-Snohomish.
"Are we going to add $30,000 to a $300,000 house so that I can save $20
a month?" asked Kristiansen. "We
really need to have a good estimate on materials and labor costs.
What we are
seeing here is too broad and too vague. I don't think it's accurate,
especially if it is coming from theoretical expertise rather than from
those who have actual experience with the hard costs.
We need clear information of whether the benefits would outweigh the
costs."
Kretz,
who serves as vice-chair of JARRC, proposed two motions. The first
requires the SBCC "to include a more rigorous and detailed analysis of
the comprehensive impact of the proposed 100 or more changes on small
businesses," including an estimate of how many jobs would be lost or
created. The second requires a more detailed cost-benefit analysis of
the proposed code changes. The motions were approved 5-0.
The SBCC
has held public hearings in Renton and Spokane on the accelerated code
changes and had intended to adopt the rules during its Oct. 29 work
session.
The results of the new cost-benefit analysis and small business impact
statement, including estimated job losses, have been requested prior to
approval of the building code changes.
# # #
EDITOR'S NOTE:
State Rep. Dan Kristiansen, R-Snohomish,
represents the 39th Legislative District, and also serves as chairman of
the Washington House Republican Caucus. He can be contacted at (360)
786-7967 or from his Web site at:
www.houserepublicans.wa.gov/Kristiansen.
For more information, contact:
John
Sattgast, Senior Information Officer: (360) 786-7257
|