HB 1188
In CommitteeHouse
Wind & solar siting approval
Requiring local government and tribal approval of wind and solar siting recommendations by the energy facility site evaluation council.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill requires local governments and federally recognized tribes to formally approve wind and solar siting recommendations before the governor can approve them. It adds a new layer of local and tribal consent to the state’s energy facility certification process, with specific timelines and approval requirements.
- Requires the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council to submit wind and solar siting recommendations to affected counties and federally recognized tribes at the same time as the governor.
- Makes approval by county legislative authority and each affected tribe a mandatory condition before the governor can approve a project — approval must be done via formal resolution within 90 days of receiving the recommendation.
- Allows counties or tribes to reject the recommendation, request reconsideration of specific parts (triggering a 60-day review period), or approve the project with conditions.
- Bars the governor from approving or executing a certification agreement unless all required approvals (from both the county and all affected tribes) have been submitted to the council.
- Sets strict timelines: council must report recommendations within 12 months (or 180 days for certain coal-plant replacement projects), and governor has 60 days to act after receiving all approvals.
- Applies only to wind and solar projects with recommendations submitted after the bill’s effective date.
Who is affected
- Counties where wind or solar projects are proposed — Must approve or reject wind/solar siting recommendations via formal resolution within 90 days of receiving the council's recommendation; their approval is required before the governor can approve the project.
- Federally recognized tribes with land or interests in the project area — Must approve or reject wind/solar siting recommendations via formal resolution within 90 days; their approval is required before the governor can approve the project.
- Energy developers proposing wind or solar facilities — Must submit applications for certification and negotiate conditions in certification agreements; projects may face longer approval timelines due to added tribal and county review steps.
- Governor's Office (acting on council recommendations) — Must review and approve or reject recommendations within strict timelines and may request revisions, giving them direct influence over final project conditions.
Pro/Con Analysis
Potential Benefits (4)
Grants counties and federally recognized tribes formal, binding authority to approve or reject siting recommendations—strengthening local sovereignty, community input, and tribal sovereignty in decisions affecting their land and communities.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(a), (b)Enables counties and tribes to request reconsideration of specific concerns (e.g., visual impact, wildlife, cultural resources), allowing for targeted modifications to projects before final approval—enhancing local oversight and potentially improving project design.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(c)(iii)Formal tribal consultation and approval requirements reinforce government-to-government relationships and uphold federal trust responsibilities, supporting tribal self-determination and meaningful participation in land-use decisions affecting their interests.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(b), (d)Establishes clear, enforceable timelines (90-day local review, 60-day governor action) to prevent indefinite delays—potentially improving predictability for all parties once the process stabilizes.
Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(e), (4)(a)
Potential Concerns (5)
Mandates counties and tribes to approve or reject siting recommendations within 90 days via formal resolution, imposing new administrative burdens and legal risks if timelines are missed—potentially straining limited local government resources and staff time without additional funding.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(b), (d)Allows counties and tribes to request reconsideration of specific parts of the draft certification agreement, triggering a 60-day review period and potentially restarting the entire approval process—creating uncertainty and delays for developers and increasing administrative costs for local governments.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(c)Bars governor approval unless *all* affected counties and tribes submit formal approval resolutions, meaning a single holdout can indefinitely stall or block a project—even if the state council and governor support it—potentially delaying clean energy deployment and associated jobs.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(d)By adding procedural delays and potential for local veto, the bill may slow the pace of renewable energy development needed to meet Washington’s climate goals (e.g., 100% clean electricity by 2045), especially for projects spanning multiple jurisdictions or near tribal boundaries.
EnvironmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(f)Energy developers face increased uncertainty and extended timelines (up to 150+ days just for local/tribal review), raising financing and permitting costs—particularly burdensome for smaller developers with limited project pipelines.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(c)
Who Is Most Affected
Counties gain formal authority and input over siting decisions, but must absorb new administrative costs and legal risks if timelines are missed. Smaller, rural counties with limited staff may be disproportionately burdened.
Federally recognized tribes gain meaningful consent authority and a formal role in decisions affecting their lands and interests—strengthening tribal sovereignty and self-determination. This is a significant recognition of treaty rights and government-to-government relationships.
Developers face longer, more uncertain permitting timelines and potential for local/tribal veto, increasing costs and financing risk—especially for smaller firms. Large developers with legal teams and diversified portfolios may absorb costs more easily.
The Governor retains final approval authority but now must wait for all local/tribal approvals first—shifting timing control to local actors. The Office gains no new power but becomes more constrained by local consensus.
Local residents and communities benefit from stronger input and oversight over large-scale projects in their area, especially regarding environmental justice and cultural resources. However, delays may slow clean energy deployment and associated local economic benefits.