This bill amends RCW 82.02.050 and repeals RCW 82.02.110. It modifies existing law governing impact fees by authorizing counties, cities, and towns that plan under RCW 36.70A.040 to impose impact fees subject to proportionality limits and specified permitted uses, and by adding detailed procedural rules for deferred collection of impact fees for single‑family detached and attached residential construction. The amendment requires jurisdictions that collect impact fees to adopt and maintain, by September 1, 2016, a deferred payment system with specified deferral options (until final inspection, until certificate of occupancy or equivalent, or until closing of the first sale after the building permit), limits deferrals to no more than 18 months from permit issuance, and entitles each applicant (by contractor registration or other unique ID) to annual deferrals for the first 20 single‑family residential building permits per county/city/town unless the jurisdiction adopts a broader ordinance. The bill creates procedural and enforcement mechanics: deferred impact fees are calculated based on fees in effect when the deferral is applied for; jurisdictions may withhold final inspection or occupancy until fees are paid; sellers are strictly liable for fees due at closing absent an agreement to the contrary; deferred fees must generally be secured by a recorded lien with specified contents and form, junior and subordinate to one construction mortgage; unpaid deferred fees may be foreclosed under chapter 61.12 RCW, and if a jurisdiction fails to initiate foreclosure within 45 days of a school district’s request, the district may institute foreclosure. It also requires jurisdictions to cooperate with the Department of Commerce and the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee, allows reasonable administrative fees for deferral processing, clarifies limits on uses of impact fees (including a specified allowance for school facility modernization when the normal 10-year expenditure timeline would end within four years), and permits a school district under certain financial conditions to use up to 25 percent of its school impact fee account for operations and maintenance with required approvals. Section 1 of the act expires January 1, 2036. Important context is missing from the provided text: the definitions and provisions found in the referenced RCW sections (for example RCW 82.02.090 and RCW 82.02.070(3)(b)) are not included here, and the text of the repealed RCW 82.02.110 is not provided. The extract also shows an apparent cross‑reference edit involving RCW 43.31.980 but does not include prior text or full legislative intent regarding that change.

If enacted, the bill would require most cities and counties to let builders of single-family homes delay paying impact fees under set options (until final inspection, certificate of occupancy, or first sale) for up to 18 months and would allow each contractor or applicant to defer the first 20 such permits per jurisdiction each year. Jurisdictions must adopt and maintain the deferral system by September 1, 2016, record a lien for deferred fees (junior to one construction mortgage), can withhold final inspections or certificates of occupancy until fees are paid, and may foreclose for unpaid fees; if a local government won’t start foreclosure within 45 days after a school district asks, the district may start it. The provision expires January 1, 2036 and some jurisdictions with older deferral programs are exempt. Those most affected are local governments, builders/contractors, home sellers and school districts. Cities and counties will face new administrative duties and potential legal actions to record liens and enforce payment; developers get short-term cash-flow relief but are limited to annual deferrals and an 18‑month cap; sellers are likely to bear payment responsibility at closing unless otherwise agreed, creating potential closing costs or liability; and school districts gain enforcement rights and, if under certain financial oversight conditions, can use up to 25 percent of impact fee balances for operations and maintenance, which could reduce funds available for capital projects. Important details referenced in other laws (definitions of “public facilities,” the ten‑year expenditure timeline, and the content of the repealed section) are not included here, so some implementation specifics remain unclear.