This bill adds a new section to chapter 36.70A RCW that requires counties and cities that must or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 to submit any housing element required under RCW 36.70A.070(2) and any housing development regulations adopted or amended on or after the effective date to a state department for review for compliance with specified laws and rules. Submissions must be made within 10 days after final legislative action and no later than six months after certain comprehensive plan update or five-year progress report deadlines. The department must issue a written final decision within 90 days, publish the decision and a public compliance list, issue minimum objective standards within six months of the section’s effective date, and may adopt rules to implement the section. The text provided does not name the department or state the effective date. The bill creates new procedural requirements and limits on local action: housing elements and related housing development regulations subject to the department review may not take effect until the department issues a final decision; that final decision may be appealed to the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB). The act adds the department’s final decisions about housing elements and development regulations to the list of agency actions that may be petitioned to the GMHB as “clearly erroneous,” sets a 60-day deadline to file such petitions measured from the department’s publication, and specifies board procedures including reliance on the local record and rules for board-adjusted population projections. The department must publish and maintain a public compliance list and final decisions must include findings and a conspicuous notice that the decision is final. The bill also imposes substantive conditions on local approvals and on developers: it defines “affordable or moderate-income housing development” with specific income and unit-share thresholds and requires developers of such projects to record legally binding, enforceable affordability restrictions for at least 25 years and for jurisdictions to periodically audit compliance or provide another compliance mechanism. A city or county subject to the section may not deny or condition affordable or moderate-income housing in ways that substantially harm viability or affordability except under four enumerated circumstances (including a department final determination of compliance or specified site/land-use limitations). The act revises periodic review schedules and procedures for comprehensive plans and urban growth areas, creates exceptions to concurrent consideration requirements (including adoption of housing elements or development regulations necessary to receive a department determination), requires five-year implementation progress reports with department-adopted guidelines and two-year work plans for corrective action, and reenacts and amends RCW 43.21C.495 to make certain nonproject ordinances and amendments—including implementation of housing element requirements—not subject to administrative or judicial appeals. Several provisions and cross-references are incomplete in the provided text, so the exact list of laws the department checks against, the full set of minimum objective standards, and some timing and procedural specifics cannot be confirmed from these excerpts.

If enacted, counties and cities that plan under the Growth Management Act would have to send their housing plans and any new or changed housing rules to a state department for review and could not put those plans or rules into effect until the department issues a written compliance decision (required within 90 days). Local governments would face new deadlines to submit materials, must publish and follow a state list of minimum objective standards, and must prepare five‑year implementation progress reports with work plans to fix any shortfalls and finish fixes within two years. Developers building projects that meet the bill’s affordability definitions would have to record legally enforceable affordability restrictions that last at least 25 years and be subject to periodic audits, and jurisdictions would be limited in denying or conditioning such projects except in narrowly listed circumstances. The most affected parties are planning cities and counties (more administrative tasks, faster timelines, potential loss of discretion over affordable housing approvals, and possible impacts on grant and loan eligibility), developers of affordable or moderate‑income housing (new long‑term covenant and audit requirements that could affect financing and costs), and the state review body and hearings board (more review, publication, and appeal work, plus higher transparency from a public compliance list). Key implementation details are missing from the available text — notably which state department is responsible, the effective date, and the content of the minimum objective standards — so the exact timing, resource needs, and practical effects on approvals and funding are uncertain.