Woodland staff outline Growth Management Act effects of being in two counties

At a special workshop April 25, city staff walked councilmembers through the legal and practical consequences of Woodland spanning two counties. "Because we had a toe in Clark County, Woodland was going to have to fully plan under the Growth Management Act," staff explained, citing prior Attorney General opinions and Growth Management Hearings Board precedent.

Staff told council that fully planning under GMA requires a comprehensive plan that covers utilities, growth projections, housing, land use, environment, transportation and infrastructure. That status also enables tools such as impact fees and tends to improve scoring on certain state grant applications, according to the presentation. Staff said the primary practical options to avoid fully planning — de-annexing the portion of the city in Clark County or moving the county line — are essentially infeasible (the latter would require a statewide constitutional amendment).

Councilmembers asked how many cities straddle county lines; staff said a small number do and Woodland is unusual because it spans a fully planning county and a partially planning county. Staff emphasized that most day-to-day differences are administrative but that the fully planning designation matters for some funding and regulatory tools.

No formal action was taken; staff said they would continue to consult with the Department of Commerce and monitor grant opportunities tied to GMA compliance.