House Bill 2679 (H-3147.2), titled the "coastal communities transparency act," adds new sections to chapter 35.21 RCW and a new section to chapter 7.48 RCW and creates new requirements for development permits in cities. For land within one-half mile of designated working economic property, industrial zoning, maritime trades, or areas where working economic conditions or farm operations are being conducted, cities must provide a notice of disclosure and require as a permit condition that the property owner sign a city-provided statement of acknowledgment that is recorded in the county auditor’s office. The required disclosure must state that the property is within or near working economic/industrial/maritime areas and may be subject to inconveniences such as noise, odors, dust, lights, machinery operation, and industrial storage or application. The development permit must include an agreement, recorded as a covenant or deed restriction running with the land (or the plat and each lot), in which the developer and future owners agree to refrain from suing to restrain or seek damages from adjacent working economic, industrial, or maritime properties for reasonable and lawful activities in the normal course of their established use. That covenant may be removed only by petition representing a majority of the land owned by property owners within one-half mile of the subject property or plat boundary and approval by the city legislative authority upon a finding that removal will not increase the city’s risk of liability. Legally, the bill creates new procedural requirements for permits (disclosure forms, recorded acknowledgments, and recorded covenants) and a substantive change limiting nuisance determinations for land/shore/sea-based industrial operations that are consistent with zoning and current good management practices. The bill adds definitions for terms such as "development permits," "good management practices," "industrial and maritime products or services," "working economic area," and "working economic operation." The provided text does not include exact RCW section numbers, an effective date, transitional rules, penalties or enforcement mechanisms, clarification of whether counties are covered, a definition of "farm operations," or resolution of wording differences between "good management practices" and "commonly accepted good management practices."

If enacted, cities would have to create and provide disclosure forms for new development permits on land within one-half mile of industrial, maritime, or working economic areas, and require developers and future buyers to sign and record an acknowledgment and a covenant/deed restriction promising not to sue adjacent industrial or maritime operations for normal, lawful activities (noise, odors, lights, machinery, etc.). That will raise administrative work for cities (making forms, managing petitions) and county auditors (recording statements), impose a recorded restriction on affected properties that can limit owners’ legal options, and likely create modest recording costs for developers and purchasers. Owners and operators of industrial, maritime, and other designated working economic properties would gain clearer protection from nuisance claims for activities consistent with zoning and good management practices, reducing their legal risk. The bill leaves some practical details unclear here—no effective date, enforcement mechanisms, penalties for noncompliance, a precise definition of “farm operations,” or whether counties are covered—so implementation timing, scope, and day-to-day enforcement are uncertain.