What Is Washington’s Housing Accountability Act?

Washington has adopted numerous laws intended to increase housing production,

expand housing choices, and address the state’s growing affordability crisis. But

passing housing legislation is only one part of the equation. Those laws must also be

incorporated into local comprehensive plans and development regulations before they

can meaningfully affect housing production.

The Housing Accountability Act is intended to close that gap.

Adopted by the Washington State Legislature in 2025 as Senate Bill 5148, the Housing

Accountability Act created a new process for the Washington State Department of

Commerce to review whether cities and counties are complying with state housing

planning requirements. The law applies to jurisdictions planning under the Growth

Management Act and is primarily codified in RCW 36.70A.835.

From planning for housing to accommodating housing

Under the Growth Management Act, local governments must periodically update their

comprehensive plans. The housing element of a comprehensive plan must identify the

community’s housing needs and demonstrate that sufficient land and development

capacity are available for housing at different income levels.

Local governments must then adopt development regulations, such as zoning, density,

parking, lot size, and building form standards, that implement the plan.

In practice, however, a comprehensive plan may appear to provide enough housing

capacity on paper while local regulations make that capacity difficult or financially

infeasible to use. Excessive parking requirements, restrictive dimensional standards,

low floor area ratios, lengthy approval processes, and other development requirements

can prevent the housing anticipated by a plan from actually being built.

The Housing Accountability Act gives Commerce a more direct role in determining

whether local plans and regulations satisfy state housing requirements.

How does the review process work?

The law establishes two paths for Commerce review.

First, a city or county may voluntarily submit its housing element and related

development regulations to Commerce. Commerce reviews the proposed materials,

provides technical assistance, and advises the jurisdiction about changes needed for

approval.

Second, Commerce may select as many as 10 cities or counties each year for a

selected review. In deciding which jurisdictions to review, Commerce may consider

factors such as whether a jurisdiction:

• Has planned for and accommodated its share of countywide housing needs;

• Is producing substantially less housing than comparable communities, after accounting for population; or

• Is producing a housing supply composed overwhelmingly of higher income, single family homes.

Commerce reviews both the jurisdiction’s housing element and the regulations that

determine what can actually be built. This can include regulations governing middle

housing, accessory dwelling units, co living housing, affordable housing, supportive

housing, parking, zoning districts, and residential development capacity.

Commerce generally has 90 days after receiving a complete application to issue a

written decision, although the review period may be extended by agreement.

What happens if a jurisdiction is not compliant?

A selected jurisdiction does not immediately lose control of its permitting decisions

simply because Commerce identifies a deficiency.

Commerce must first notify the jurisdiction of the problems it has identified and propose

corrective amendments. The jurisdiction then ordinarily has 120 days to revise its

housing element or development regulations, although Commerce may agree to extend

that period.

The law’s strongest consequences apply only if a selected jurisdiction fails to make the

required corrections or if its revised materials are again determined to be noncompliant.

At that point, the jurisdiction may become ineligible for certain state infrastructure grants

and loans. It may also be prohibited from denying a qualifying affordable or moderate

income housing development, or imposing conditions that substantially harm the

project’s viability or affordability, unless one of the law’s exceptions applies. This

provision is sometimes called the “builder’s remedy.”

A project using this remedy must provide enforceable affordability commitments for at

least 25 years. Depending on the project, the law requires:

• At least 20 percent of the units to qualify as affordable housing;

• At least 50 percent of the units to qualify as workforce housing; or

• All units to qualify as moderate income housing.

The remedy does not override every land use restriction. Exceptions remain for projects

outside an urban growth area, within critical areas or their buffers, in shoreline areas

where residential development is prohibited, or in locations where neither the

comprehensive plan nor zoning allows residential or mixed use development.

Why does this matter in Kitsap County?

The law has already become directly relevant to Kitsap County. In January 2026,

Commerce selected the City of Bainbridge Island as one of the first jurisdictions to

undergo selected review.

Commerce subsequently found that the city’s submitted housing element and

development regulations were inconsistent with several state requirements, including

the requirement to identify sufficient land capacity for its housing needs. Commerce

directed the city to amend its plans and regulations, beginning a process involving

additional land capacity analysis and potential changes to development standards.

Bainbridge Island’s experience illustrates the central purpose of the Housing

Accountability Act. Local governments must do more than identify a theoretical number

of housing units in a planning document. Their zoning and development regulations

must provide a realistic path for that housing to be constructed.

Accountability must include housing feasibility

The Housing Accountability Act represents a significant change in Washington’s

approach to housing planning. It gives the state a stronger mechanism for ensuring that

local governments implement housing laws rather than simply acknowledging them in

comprehensive plans.

That accountability is necessary. Washington cannot meet its housing needs if

communities adopt regulations that technically create capacity but make development

impractical or financially infeasible.

At the same time, compliance should not become an exercise in checking boxes.

Density shown on a map does not automatically produce housing. Development

standards, infrastructure availability, permit costs, review timelines, construction

expenses, and market conditions all affect whether a project can move forward.

For the Housing Accountability Act to succeed, Commerce and local governments must

listen to the builders, developers, housing providers, and residents who understand how

these policies operate in practice. The goal should not merely be compliant plans. It

should be clear, predictable, and workable regulations that allow communities to

produce the full range of housing Washington residents need.