Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.260 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Each petition for review that is filed with the growth management hearings board shall be heard and decided by a regional panel of growth management hearings board members. Regional panels shall be constituted as follows:

(a) Central Puget Sound region. A three-member central Puget Sound panel shall be selected to hear matters pertaining to cities and counties located within the region comprised of King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap counties.

(b) Eastern Washington region. A three-member eastern Washington panel shall be selected to hear matters pertaining to cities and counties that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 and are located east of the crest of the Cascade mountains.

(c) Western Washington region. A three-member western Washington panel shall be selected to hear matters pertaining to cities and counties that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040, are located west of the crest of the Cascade mountains, and are not included in the central Puget Sound region. Skamania county, if it is required or chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.040, may elect to be included within either the western Washington region or the eastern Washington region.

(2)(a) Each regional panel selected to hear and decide cases shall consist of three board members, at least a majority of whom shall reside within the region in which the case arose, unless such members cannot sit on a particular case because of recusal or disqualification, or unless the board chair determines otherwise due to caseload management determinations or the unavailability of a board member due to illness, absence, or vacancy. The presiding officer of each case shall reside within the region in which the case arose, unless the board chair determines that there is an emergency.

(b) Except as provided otherwise in this subsection (2)(b), each regional panel must: (i) Include one member admitted to practice law in this state; (ii) include one member who has been a city or county elected official; and (iii) reflect the political composition of the board. The requirements of this subsection (2)(b) may be waived by the board chair due to member unavailability, significant workload imbalances, or other reasons.

[ 2020 c 214 s 3; 2010 c 211 s 5; 1994 c 249 s 30; 1991 sp.s. c 32 s 6.]

Notes:

Effective date—Transfer of power, duties, and functions—2010 c 211: See notes following RCW 36.70A.250.

Severability—Application—1994 c 249: See notes following RCW 34.05.310.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases, 1998–2013 · leading case: King Cnty. v. Cent. Puget Sound, 14 P.3d 133 (Wash. 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

King Cnty. v. Cent. Puget Sound, 14 P.3d 133 (Wash. 2000). “" RCW 36.70A.260(1). At least one member of each board must be admitted to practice law in this state, and at least one member must have been a city or county elected official.”

King Cnty. v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 142 Wash. 2d 543 (Wash. 2000). “” RCW 36.70A.260(1). At least one member of each board must be admitted to practice law in this state, and at least one member must have been a city or county elected official.”

Lewis Cnty. v. W. Wa. Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 139 P.3d 1096 (Wash. 2006). “In order to be eligible to participate on a GMA Board, the GMA simply requires of members (1) that at least one attorney and one former local elected official serve on each board, (2) that each board member reside within the region for which the GMA Board has jurisdiction and is…”

Lewis Cnty. v. W. Washington Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 157 Wash. 2d 488 (Wash. 2006). “RCW 36.70A.260. ¶40 In summary, in order to effectuate the true legislative intent of the GMA, local legislative bodies must be free to address local needs and concerns.”

Skagit Surveyors v. FRIENDS OF SKAGIT, 958 P.2d 962 (Wash. 1998). “RCW 36.70A.260. [4] Former RCW 36.70A.300 was amended during the 1997 legislative session.”

Skagit Surveyors & Engineers, LLC v. Friends of Skagit Cnty., 135 Wash. 2d 542 (Wash. 1998). “RCW 36.70A.260. Former RCW 36.70A.300 was amended during the 1997 legislative session.”

Swinomish Indian Tribal Cmty. v. W. Washington Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 161 Wash. 2d 415 (Wash. 2007). “RCW 36.70A.260. They do not have, indeed cannot have, legislative power over land use.”

Kittitas Cnty. v. Kittitas Cnty. Conservation Coalition, 308 P.3d 745 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “The Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board has jurisdiction over such petitions arising from counties “east of the crest of the Cascade Mountains,” including Kittitas County.”

Feil v. E. Washington Growth Mgmt. Hearings, 259 P.3d 227 (Wash. 2011). “RCW 36.70A.260(1)(b). ¶ 17 Pursuant to RCW 36.”

Feil v. E. Washington Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 172 Wash. 2d 367 (Wash. 2011). “RCW 36.70A.260(l)(b). ¶20 In accordance with RCW 36.”

Manke Lumber Co., Inc. v. Diehl, 959 P.2d 1173 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998). “” 8 RCW 36.70A.260. See also WAC 365-195; WAC 242-02-632.”

Swinomish Indian v. W. Washington, 166 P.3d 1198 (Wash. 2007). “RCW 36.70A.260. They do not have, indeed cannot have, legislative power over land use.”

Show all 14 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.260(1) — 2 cases

— Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.260(1)(b) — 3 cases

Feil v. E. Washington Growth Mgmt. Hearings, 259 P.3d 227 (Wash. 2011). “RCW 36.70A.260(1)(b). ¶ 17 Pursuant to RCW 36.”

Kittitas Cnty. v. Kittitas Cnty. Conservation & Futurewise (Wash. Ct. App. 2013).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.260(l)(b) — 2 cases

Feil v. E. Washington Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 172 Wash. 2d 367 (Wash. 2011). “RCW 36.70A.260(l)(b). ¶20 In accordance with RCW 36.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.