A thread for serious discussion of Washington Senate bill 5778

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by jburkeson1

Short people got no reason to live.

I had a friend in the Army who was very short, he used to make who ever he was going to chew out go get a bucket or something for him to stand on while he "discussed" their short comings, one day he fell off the bucket and almost knocked himself out, another Platoon Sgt and I built him a stool, he carried around in his APC and used it not only for ***** chewings, but to stand on so that he could see out of the hatch, I hadn't thought of him in years, we used to tell him the same thing. You never wanted to dig a foxhole with him because he always wanted to stop half way.

[Harold E. Miller]

Hey....its' "height challenged"mister Capaul.

[Nick Gromicko]

Substitute Bill introduced http://www.nachi.org/documents/S-2054.1.pdf

[Justin L. Nickelsen]

Proposed Bill 5788 (specifically, its substitute) was to be voted on yesterday (monday), but was posponed until today.

Time: 1:30pm (PST)

Agenda: http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/sh...8&Acronym=LCRD

NOTE: They don't necessarily follow the order of the agenda.

Webcast Live: http://www.tvw.org/media/index.cfm

NOTE: If you want to watch it Live, follow the link above, click on "Live Television Signal". They have choosen those proceedings to be live (they have multiple choices for the live WebCasts).

-------

If you don't get a chance to watch it live because you are actually doing ... your job... you can "watch" it tomorrow (usually takes a day for the video to be updated), or you can get the audio later today. If you get the audio later today, you will usually have to sift through the entire proceedings until you find where they discussed it. If you just want the audio from the discussion of the Inspection Bill, they separate it usually the next day.

If you want to watch, listen, etc. later, utilize the following link:

http://www.tvw.org/media/recentevnt....TOKEN=50490125

--------

WITH REGARD TO "OTHER THINGS"...

I haven't really ever followed much of your (the few of you) conversation in this thread. I quickly found, after it began, that the title was misleading: "A Thread for SERIOUS Discussion of Washington Senate Bill 5788".

I can't blame people for not knowing "what is going on"--that is difficult to do unless you have talked to the Senators, know the people involved with WHILAG, have testified in front of the Committee and/or have written testimony and submitted it, etc. etc. etc. (I have).

However, I feel that the "language" and "insults" (regardless of who, why, when, etc.) is really sad. You are all "grown ups", "professionals", etc. (all, probably much older than I am) and there is no room for such comments OR direct response to such comments.

I think NICK should "seriously" (to employ words utilized in the title of this thread) consider deleting such comments. THESE COMMENTS QUICKLY SHOW UP IN SEARCH ENGINE RESULTS AND CAST A BAD LIGHT UPON NACHI AND THE HOME INSPECTION "PROFESSION" AT LARGE.

I don't think I need to single any individuals out....

Grow up, chill out, do something meaningful if you have concerns about the Bill.

Best Wishes,

JN
www.NickelsenHomeInspections.com

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by jnickelsen

Grow up, chill out, do something meaningful if you have concerns about the Bill.

Relax it is all a part of the grand chaos theory, all is as it should be.

[dhelm]

Originally Posted by jnickelsen

Proposed Bill 5788 (specifically, its substitute) was to be voted on yesterday (monday), but was posponed until today.

Time: 1:30pm (PST)

Agenda: http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/sh...8&Acronym=LCRD

NOTE: They don't necessarily follow the order of the agenda.

Webcast Live: http://www.tvw.org/media/index.cfm

NOTE: If you want to watch it Live, follow the link above, click on "Live Television Signal". They have choosen those proceedings to be live (they have multiple choices for the live WebCasts).

-------

If you don't get a chance to watch it live because you are actually doing ... your job... you can "watch" it tomorrow (usually takes a day for the video to be updated), or you can get the audio later today. If you get the audio later today, you will usually have to sift through the entire proceedings until you find where they discussed it. If you just want the audio from the discussion of the Inspection Bill, they separate it usually the next day.

If you want to watch, listen, etc. later, utilize the following link:

http://www.tvw.org/media/recentevnt....TOKEN=50490125

--------

WITH REGARD TO "OTHER THINGS"...

I haven't really ever followed much of your (the few of you) conversation in this thread. I quickly found, after it began, that the title was misleading: "A Thread for SERIOUS Discussion of Washington Senate Bill 5788".

I can't blame people for not knowing "what is going on"--that is difficult to do unless you have talked to the Senators, know the people involved with WHILAG, have testified in front of the Committee and/or have written testimony and submitted it, etc. etc. etc. (I have).

However, I feel that the "language" and "insults" (regardless of who, why, when, etc.) is really sad. You are all "grown ups", "professionals", etc. (all, probably much older than I am) and there is no room for such comments OR direct response to such comments.

I think NICK should "seriously" (to employ words utilized in the title of this thread) consider deleting such comments. THESE COMMENTS QUICKLY SHOW UP IN SEARCH ENGINE RESULTS AND CAST A BAD LIGHT UPON NACHI AND THE HOME INSPECTION "PROFESSION" AT LARGE.

I don't think I need to single any individuals out....

Grow up, chill out, do something meaningful if you have concerns about the Bill.

Best Wishes,

JN
www.NickelsenHomeInspections.com

Thanks, I started this thread to get away from all the crap in the previous Washington state thread. There is now a new one, started by Peter Doane to try to get things back on discussion of the proposed legislation. It may be that thread drift is unavoidable on this board.

[Justin L. Nickelsen]

February 27th, 2007
1:30pm PST
Executive Session – Home Inspection Legislation


Specific Time: The bill was discussed at approximately 2:41pm for about 4 minutes (use previously noted links if you wish to hear audio or see video... you can skip to that part of the discussion... it will be seperated tomorrow possibly).

Status: The revised Bill (see Nick's link above) was passed and referred to Rules Comittee, Subject to Signature

Significant Changes:

1. Structural Pest License - The new bill took out the commentary that would have essentially combined the "Home Inspection License" with the "Structural Pest License". While still somewhat vague, it appears that performing home inspections in Washington will require two licenses: one as a home inspector, one as a structural pest inspector. If fully passed, Washington State would have the strictest regulations on home inspectors in the Country, requiring that home inspectors be both "home inspectors" and "structural pest inspectors"

2. From DOL to DLI - The first bill had the Department of Licensing be the governing body of Home Inspectors (and asked that the Department of Agriculture transfer Pest Inspector licensing to the Department of Licensing). The new bill has the Department of Labor and Industries governing Home Inspectors.

3. Other minor changes include a loosening of the insurance requirements, allowing any applicable insurance or bonds now acceptable by the Department of Agriculture; some changes to the education requirements prior to and after licensing; established a point system that would be necessary for somebody to take the test(s) and, subsequently, be licensed as a Home Inspector (copied from Oregon law); etc.

Other:

1. Not Over - They did make it known that this is "not yet over", meaning that people who have recommendations, suggestions, etc. can still offer them. If you are an inspector and have not made your voice heard to those who "represent us", you should...

2. Lessening of Credit Hours - They are now only requiring 30 continuing education credits every two years.

-------------------------------

My Comments:

When I testified on February 12th to the Committee, I strongly suggested that that there should be two licenses. One of my concerns over the initial bill was that they were "reinventing the wheel", by requiring changes that were not necessary. I strongly felt that there was no reason to deal with the issue of the Structural Pest Inspector licensing, except to say that a "home inspector" had to be a licensed "structural pest inspector" as well.

I recommended the following:

1. Leave the governing of the Structural Pest Inspectors to the Department of Agriculture as they are the ones that specialize in this area.
2. Require that a "home inspector" be a licensed Structural Pest Inspector with the Washington State Departmen of Agriculture as well (basically, the way it already is, except that the State will be involved with the Home Inspection portion for the first time).

Likewise, I felt that having Home Inspectors governed by the Department of Licensing was a bad idea. They do not govern anything that is remotely close to "home inspectors"--they govern other things, like Drivers Licenses.

Rather, I strongly suggested the following:

1. That the Department of Labor and Industries be the ones that govern home inspectors in the State of Washington as the DLI is already closely related to the home inspection industry, governing all Code Inspecftors, manufactured homes, etc. etc. etc. As such, I am very glad to see that they made this change.

I also felt that there was no need to establish new Standards of Practice or Code of Ethics. Rather, if they required that all State Licensed Home Inspectors be members of NACHI, NAHI or ASHI all home inspectors would have to follow those Standards of Practice and Code of Ethics. That would keep the State from "recreateing the wheel" (making uncessary law), it would take care of some "formalities", and yet it would allow for some legitimate differences among home inspectors in the State. I am sorry that they didn't take that recommendation seriously enough to change it. However, they are still taking suggestions, so I am going to offer that again.

Likewise, I don't feel that it is necessarry to creat a new test. The State should be in the business of creating minimal law--i.e. establishing the minimum standards by which a Home Inspector practices in Washington State. As such, I felt that they should have done what some other states have done: require that all home inspectors pass the National Home Inspector Examination. That test is a good "minimum knowledge test", is adopted by other States, and was created by an independent organization. I am sorry that they didn't take that recommendation seriously enough to change it. However, they are still taking suggestions, so I am going to offer that again.

In Short:

I think the new changes to the bill are good. While I would like to see a few more before it becomes law, I also realize that there is "no perfect law"--i.e. somebody is always going to have a legitimate complaint. However, I hope that such "complaints" won't impeed the process of creating meaningful legislation in Washington State to protect consumers who are ignorant of the home inspection process and who are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on real estate.

Warm Regards,

Justin Nickelsen
www.NickelsenHomeInspections.com

[wforsyth]

Justin,

Do you know anything about why the committee avoided the Sunrise process? Do you see it as a possibility that they will face the same situation as with the last bill and be required to demonstrate why legislation is necessary for the good of the consumer?

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by jnickelsen

February 27th, 2007
1:30pm PST
Executive Session – Home Inspection Legislation


Specific Time: The bill was discussed at approximately 2:41pm for about 4 minutes (use previously noted links if you wish to hear audio or see video... you can skip to that part of the discussion... it will be seperated tomorrow possibly).

Status: The revised Bill (see Nick's link above) was passed and referred to Rules Comittee, Subject to Signature

Significant Changes:

1. Structural Pest License - The new bill took out the commentary that would have essentially combined the "Home Inspection License" with the "Structural Pest License". While still somewhat vague, it appears that performing home inspections in Washington will require two licenses: one as a home inspector, one as a structural pest inspector. If fully passed, Washington State would have the strictest regulations on home inspectors in the Country, requiring that home inspectors be both "home inspectors" and "structural pest inspectors"

2. From DOL to DLI - The first bill had the Department of Licensing be the governing body of Home Inspectors (and asked that the Department of Agriculture transfer Pest Inspector licensing to the Department of Licensing). The new bill has the Department of Labor and Industries governing Home Inspectors.

3. Other minor changes include a loosening of the insurance requirements, allowing any applicable insurance or bonds now acceptable by the Department of Agriculture; some changes to the education requirements prior to and after licensing; established a point system that would be necessary for somebody to take the test(s) and, subsequently, be licensed as a Home Inspector (copied from Oregon law); etc.

Other:

1. Not Over - They did make it known that this is "not yet over", meaning that people who have recommendations, suggestions, etc. can still offer them. If you are an inspector and have not made your voice heard to those who "represent us", you should...

2. Lessening of Credit Hours - They are now only requiring 30 continuing education credits every two years.

-------------------------------

My Comments:

When I testified on February 12th to the Committee, I strongly suggested that that there should be two licenses. One of my concerns over the initial bill was that they were "reinventing the wheel", by requiring changes that were not necessary. I strongly felt that there was no reason to deal with the issue of the Structural Pest Inspector licensing, except to say that a "home inspector" had to be a licensed "structural pest inspector" as well.

I recommended the following:

1. Leave the governing of the Structural Pest Inspectors to the Department of Agriculture as they are the ones that specialize in this area.
2. Require that a "home inspector" be a licensed Structural Pest Inspector with the Washington State Departmen of Agriculture as well (basically, the way it already is, except that the State will be involved with the Home Inspection portion for the first time).

Likewise, I felt that having Home Inspectors governed by the Department of Licensing was a bad idea. They do not govern anything that is remotely close to "home inspectors"--they govern other things, like Drivers Licenses.

Rather, I strongly suggested the following:

1. That the Department of Labor and Industries be the ones that govern home inspectors in the State of Washington as the DLI is already closely related to the home inspection industry, governing all Code Inspecftors, manufactured homes, etc. etc. etc. As such, I am very glad to see that they made this change.

I also felt that there was no need to establish new Standards of Practice or Code of Ethics. Rather, if they required that all State Licensed Home Inspectors be members of NACHI, NAHI or ASHI all home inspectors would have to follow those Standards of Practice and Code of Ethics. That would keep the State from "recreateing the wheel" (making uncessary law), it would take care of some "formalities", and yet it would allow for some legitimate differences among home inspectors in the State. I am sorry that they didn't take that recommendation seriously enough to change it. However, they are still taking suggestions, so I am going to offer that again.

Likewise, I don't feel that it is necessarry to creat a new test. The State should be in the business of creating minimal law--i.e. establishing the minimum standards by which a Home Inspector practices in Washington State. As such, I felt that they should have done what some other states have done: require that all home inspectors pass the National Home Inspector Examination. That test is a good "minimum knowledge test", is adopted by other States, and was created by an independent organization. I am sorry that they didn't take that recommendation seriously enough to change it. However, they are still taking suggestions, so I am going to offer that again.

In Short:

I think the new changes to the bill are good. While I would like to see a few more before it becomes law, I also realize that there is "no perfect law"--i.e. somebody is always going to have a legitimate complaint. However, I hope that such "complaints" won't impeed the process of creating meaningful legislation in Washington State to protect consumers who are ignorant of the home inspection process and who are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on real estate.

Warm Regards,

Justin Nickelsen
www.NickelsenHomeInspections.com

JUstin,

Thanks for all the work, I agree with most of your suggestions, but not with the SOP or the mandatory membership in a National Organization.

My suggestion was that the State develop an SOP based on the SOP's of the main Home Inspector Associations with the ability of the board to make changes, to make the SOP's of NACHI, ASHI, and others acceptable to the State would make things more confusing and difficult legally, there is already one SOP that is in Conflict with the bill, working on an inspected home. The State should adopt it's own SOP yet they could word the law so that it must be met or exceeded, which should allow the Associations to use their own or adapt them to fit the law. Mandatory membership in an Association is very similar to a "closed shop" Union State, and that doesn't fly anymore. What purpose would mandatory membership serve?

I also suggested that they either leave the SPI alone and under the control of the WSDA, or make it optional for Licensed Home Inspectors, I also suggested the DLI, although I almost gagged doing it, I hated dealing with them before, but they are the correct agency to govern Home Inspection.

I also suggested the NHIE instead of a New Test, the NHIE is already set up Nationally and can be proctored at many different locations, saving the State the expense both of developing a New Test and of administering it.

I also still have a problem with their "College Classroom" requirements. seeing as Home Inspection is not offered everywhere in the State. ITA, Carson Dunlop, and many other Courses both Classroom. Correspondence, and Internet are recognized by many other States, and would work well in a State so spread out as Washington, sometimes the Legislators forget about all of us on the East Side of the mountains, even the ones from this side.

One other thing I have problems with is the two year SPI license requirement, I proposed that the 100 required inspections for grandfathering be verified by Icon's, but why should an inspector have to be licensed for any given amount of time, some may never perform 100 inspections, others may do 100 inspections in their first 6 months.

Thanks again for keeping track of this.

[Harold E. Miller]

Justin
Thanks for taking the time to provide the information regarding the committees actions on the approval of the revised bill, and its referall to the Rules Comittee. Doesn't seem like they spent alot of time on it today. I still need to listen to the audio, but will wait until it is sorted tomorrow.

Personally I am not for the HI legislation in any form, and I have made it clear to the senators, and will continue to. But I can be objective and debate the points of the bill as it goes through its' metamorphisis.

I thought it was strange that they wanted to put HI's under the DOL, instead of L&I. As a contractor I was licensed under L&I, which just makes more sense. Glad they made that change also.

Loosening of the insurance requirements to allow similar choices to what we already have under the SPI law also makes more sense. If an inspector has the financial ability to assign an account, then he/she should be able to provide that in lieu of an E&O policy, or a combination bond and E&O, etc. These are all personal business decisions that each HI should be able to make for themselves. We already provide a FRIC statement annually for our SPI, and that seems to work fine.

I am glad they took out the combined license for SPI and HI portion. These should be seperate. It is not like HI's are the only people with SPI licenses, and it would have had a much larger impact on other groups of licensees.

Good post Justin.

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

For those that want to listen to Tuesday hearing here is the link. The Home Inspection Bill started at 1:05:18 into the hearing. If you use a player that has a timer, you can just move to that point.

http://www.tvw.org/MediaPlayer/Archi...7020240&TYPE=A

Steve

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

For those wondering on where the bill goes from this point on, here is the information on the Rules Committee, where the bill is currently.

A Shorthand Guide to the
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE


A measure that has been favorably reported back to the Senate by a standing committee is first sent to the Senate Rules Committee. The Rules Committee determines which bills advance to the 2nd and 3rd Reading Calendar for consideration by the full Senate and possible final passage. The Rules Committee has the ability to prevent floor action on a measure by never giving it a place on the calendar. Determining which measures advance to the floor calendar is its most prominent duty.
Senate Rules Committee meetings are open to the public, however to prevent undue influence upon Committee members while they are making these important selections, no member may be approached by the public once seated at the Rules table. At the direction of the Chair, the Sergeant-At-Arms is responsible for maintaining order during Rules Committee meetings.
Currently, there are 20 members on the Senate Rules Committee: the Lt. Governor; 11 majority members; and 8 minority members. By rule, Lt. Governor Brad Owen chairs the committee and is a voting member. During his absence or when he is serving as acting-Governor, Senator Franklin, President Pro Tempore of the Senate and Vice Chair of Rules, will chair the committee. Secretary of the Senate, Thomas Hoemann, and Deputy Secretary, Brad Hendrickson, staff the Rules Committee and are assisted by both Senate Counsels. The Rules Committee selects the bills for floor action and prepares the floor calendar for the day. There are two calendars (lists) in Senate Rules, a White Sheet and a Green Sheet, which contain all measures awaiting action in Rules.
At the beginning of each meeting, the Majority Leader will announce how many “pulls”, or requests, each member will get to advance a bill from the Green Sheet to the floor calendar and then from White Sheet to the Green Sheet. Usually, a bill only moves one step during a Rules meeting.
The White Sheet is where bills are listed immediately after being passed out of a standing committee. This is more-or-less a review calendar. When the Rules Committee considers bills on the White Sheet, they are pulled to the Green Sheet without debate or a vote. Each member, in order in which they are seated, announces the bill of their choice from the White Sheet that they are pulling. Members may opt to NOT pull a bill on their turn, but they lose that pull. This process continues until all members’ pulls are used. Once pulled to the Green Sheet, the bills are eligible to be pulled to the floor calendar at the next Rules meeting.
The Green Sheet is a consideration calendar made up of bills pulled by Rules members from the White Sheet and is the list of bills now eligible to go directly to the floor. The process is similar to pulls from the White Sheet, but bills pulled from the Green Sheet are debated and voted on in Rules prior to being placed on the floor calendar. Members move to place a particular bill on the calendar, give a short synopsis of the bill and its merits. At this point, other Rules members may ask clarifying questions or debate the merits of the bill, after which the Chair will call for a vote.
Most bills advance on a voice vote, but divisions are often called and a show of hands may decide a bill’s fate. Any member may request an oral roll call on any bill before it goes to the floor. If an oral roll call is requested, the Deputy Secretary calls the name of each member of the Rules Committee who votes “aye” or “nay” on the bill in question, and announces the total vote. The Chair then announces the fate of the bill. If a member attempts to pull a bill from the Green Sheet and it fails, that bill does not stay on the Green Sheet but returns to the White Sheet and begins the Rules Committee process anew. The member that requested the failed bill does not get another choice; it counts as one of their “pulls.”
A Flash Calendar is usually circulated after each Rules meeting. It includes a list of measures approved by the Rules committee to be placed on the 2nd & 3rd Reading (floor) Calendar. These measures are usually "pulled" from the Green Sheet but occasionally they are moved directly from the White Sheet to the floor calendar. The measures on the Flash Calendar are added to any remaining items on the floor calendar and a new or supplemental 2nd & 3rd Reading Calendar is created.
After certain cut-off dates, as a house-keeping measure the Senate Rules Committee sometimes places bills no longer eligible for consideration in the “X-File”. This removes them from calendars, and the daily status sheet, keeping those lists from becoming too long and unwieldy. They usually remain in the X-File until the end of the biennium.
The vast majority of bills are placed on the Senate floor calendar through the two step process of being pulled from the White Sheet to the Green Sheet and then from the Green Sheet to the floor calendar. However, a “package pull,” or a list of bills voted to the floor calendar together on a single vote, is sometimes voted out. This is done on rare occasions, usually before a cutoff or the end of session, or when the Senate is going to act on one topic addressed by several bills.
The Rules Committee determines the order in which bills are placed on the floor calendar. Usually this is in the order in which they are pulled out of the Rules Committee. Formally known as the 2nd and 3rd Reading Calendar, the Senate floor calendar is traditionally printed on yellow paper and commonly referred to as the yellow calendar.
Gubernatorial Appointments (GAs) move through the Rules Committee in the same manner as bills. These appointments are usually placed on a Gubernatorial Appointments Calendar which is also printed on yellow paper, but single GAs sometimes appear on the regular yellow calendar together with other measures.
Occasionally, the Committee will create a consent calendar composed of bills that have unanimous or near-unanimous support (with little or no opposition). These bills can come from either the White or Green Sheets and are placed on a separate Consent Calendar for the floor. The consent calendar is traditionally pink in color and is commonly referred to as the pink calendar.

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by sstanczyk

For those wondering on where the bill goes from this point on, here is the information on the Rules Committee, where the bill is currently.

A Shorthand Guide to the
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE


A measure that has been favorably reported back to the Senate by a standing committee is first sent to the Senate Rules Committee. The Rules Committee determines which bills advance to the 2nd and 3rd Reading Calendar for consideration by the full Senate and possible final passage. The Rules Committee has the ability to prevent floor action on a measure by never giving it a place on the calendar. Determining which measures advance to the floor calendar is its most prominent duty.
Senate Rules Committee meetings are open to the public, however to prevent undue influence upon Committee members while they are making these important selections, no member may be approached by the public once seated at the Rules table. At the direction of the Chair, the Sergeant-At-Arms is responsible for maintaining order during Rules Committee meetings.
Currently, there are 20 members on the Senate Rules Committee: the Lt. Governor; 11 majority members; and 8 minority members. By rule, Lt. Governor Brad Owen chairs the committee and is a voting member. During his absence or when he is serving as acting-Governor, Senator Franklin, President Pro Tempore of the Senate and Vice Chair of Rules, will chair the committee. Secretary of the Senate, Thomas Hoemann, and Deputy Secretary, Brad Hendrickson, staff the Rules Committee and are assisted by both Senate Counsels. The Rules Committee selects the bills for floor action and prepares the floor calendar for the day. There are two calendars (lists) in Senate Rules, a White Sheet and a Green Sheet, which contain all measures awaiting action in Rules.
At the beginning of each meeting, the Majority Leader will announce how many “pulls”, or requests, each member will get to advance a bill from the Green Sheet to the floor calendar and then from White Sheet to the Green Sheet. Usually, a bill only moves one step during a Rules meeting.
The White Sheet is where bills are listed immediately after being passed out of a standing committee. This is more-or-less a review calendar. When the Rules Committee considers bills on the White Sheet, they are pulled to the Green Sheet without debate or a vote. Each member, in order in which they are seated, announces the bill of their choice from the White Sheet that they are pulling. Members may opt to NOT pull a bill on their turn, but they lose that pull. This process continues until all members’ pulls are used. Once pulled to the Green Sheet, the bills are eligible to be pulled to the floor calendar at the next Rules meeting.
The Green Sheet is a consideration calendar made up of bills pulled by Rules members from the White Sheet and is the list of bills now eligible to go directly to the floor. The process is similar to pulls from the White Sheet, but bills pulled from the Green Sheet are debated and voted on in Rules prior to being placed on the floor calendar. Members move to place a particular bill on the calendar, give a short synopsis of the bill and its merits. At this point, other Rules members may ask clarifying questions or debate the merits of the bill, after which the Chair will call for a vote.
Most bills advance on a voice vote, but divisions are often called and a show of hands may decide a bill’s fate. Any member may request an oral roll call on any bill before it goes to the floor. If an oral roll call is requested, the Deputy Secretary calls the name of each member of the Rules Committee who votes “aye” or “nay” on the bill in question, and announces the total vote. The Chair then announces the fate of the bill. If a member attempts to pull a bill from the Green Sheet and it fails, that bill does not stay on the Green Sheet but returns to the White Sheet and begins the Rules Committee process anew. The member that requested the failed bill does not get another choice; it counts as one of their “pulls.”
A Flash Calendar is usually circulated after each Rules meeting. It includes a list of measures approved by the Rules committee to be placed on the 2nd & 3rd Reading (floor) Calendar. These measures are usually "pulled" from the Green Sheet but occasionally they are moved directly from the White Sheet to the floor calendar. The measures on the Flash Calendar are added to any remaining items on the floor calendar and a new or supplemental 2nd & 3rd Reading Calendar is created.
After certain cut-off dates, as a house-keeping measure the Senate Rules Committee sometimes places bills no longer eligible for consideration in the “X-File”. This removes them from calendars, and the daily status sheet, keeping those lists from becoming too long and unwieldy. They usually remain in the X-File until the end of the biennium.
The vast majority of bills are placed on the Senate floor calendar through the two step process of being pulled from the White Sheet to the Green Sheet and then from the Green Sheet to the floor calendar. However, a “package pull,” or a list of bills voted to the floor calendar together on a single vote, is sometimes voted out. This is done on rare occasions, usually before a cutoff or the end of session, or when the Senate is going to act on one topic addressed by several bills.
The Rules Committee determines the order in which bills are placed on the floor calendar. Usually this is in the order in which they are pulled out of the Rules Committee. Formally known as the 2nd and 3rd Reading Calendar, the Senate floor calendar is traditionally printed on yellow paper and commonly referred to as the yellow calendar.
Gubernatorial Appointments (GAs) move through the Rules Committee in the same manner as bills. These appointments are usually placed on a Gubernatorial Appointments Calendar which is also printed on yellow paper, but single GAs sometimes appear on the regular yellow calendar together with other measures.
Occasionally, the Committee will create a consent calendar composed of bills that have unanimous or near-unanimous support (with little or no opposition). These bills can come from either the White or Green Sheets and are placed on a separate Consent Calendar for the floor. The consent calendar is traditionally pink in color and is commonly referred to as the pink calendar.

Considering how many bills Spanel is sponsoring, she'll have to decide whether or not the HI bill is most important or the bills recognizing the contribution of the WATATO, certain Veterans, other special interest groups, etc... If it turns out that the HI bill being pulled to the green sheet would get in the way of something else that someone else has lobbied more heavily for, then she'll leave it to die and it won't make it out of the rules committee.

[Harold E. Miller]

Originally Posted by sstanczyk

For those wondering on where the bill goes from this point on, here is the information on the Rules Committee, where the bill is currently.

A Shorthand Guide to the
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE


A measure that has been favorably reported back to the Senate by a standing committee is first sent to the Senate Rules Committee. The Rules Committee determines which bills advance to the 2nd and 3rd Reading Calendar for consideration by the full Senate and possible final passage. The Rules Committee has the ability to prevent floor action on a measure by never giving it a place on the calendar. Determining which measures advance to the floor calendar is its most prominent duty.
Senate Rules Committee meetings are open to the public, however to prevent undue influence upon Committee members while they are making these important selections, no member may be approached by the public once seated at the Rules table. At the direction of the Chair, the Sergeant-At-Arms is responsible for maintaining order during Rules Committee meetings.
Currently, there are 20 members on the Senate Rules Committee: the Lt. Governor; 11 majority members; and 8 minority members. By rule, Lt. Governor Brad Owen chairs the committee and is a voting member. During his absence or when he is serving as acting-Governor, Senator Franklin, President Pro Tempore of the Senate and Vice Chair of Rules, will chair the committee. Secretary of the Senate, Thomas Hoemann, and Deputy Secretary, Brad Hendrickson, staff the Rules Committee and are assisted by both Senate Counsels. The Rules Committee selects the bills for floor action and prepares the floor calendar for the day. There are two calendars (lists) in Senate Rules, a White Sheet and a Green Sheet, which contain all measures awaiting action in Rules.
At the beginning of each meeting, the Majority Leader will announce how many “pulls”, or requests, each member will get to advance a bill from the Green Sheet to the floor calendar and then from White Sheet to the Green Sheet. Usually, a bill only moves one step during a Rules meeting.
The White Sheet is where bills are listed immediately after being passed out of a standing committee. This is more-or-less a review calendar. When the Rules Committee considers bills on the White Sheet, they are pulled to the Green Sheet without debate or a vote. Each member, in order in which they are seated, announces the bill of their choice from the White Sheet that they are pulling. Members may opt to NOT pull a bill on their turn, but they lose that pull. This process continues until all members’ pulls are used. Once pulled to the Green Sheet, the bills are eligible to be pulled to the floor calendar at the next Rules meeting.
The Green Sheet is a consideration calendar made up of bills pulled by Rules members from the White Sheet and is the list of bills now eligible to go directly to the floor. The process is similar to pulls from the White Sheet, but bills pulled from the Green Sheet are debated and voted on in Rules prior to being placed on the floor calendar. Members move to place a particular bill on the calendar, give a short synopsis of the bill and its merits. At this point, other Rules members may ask clarifying questions or debate the merits of the bill, after which the Chair will call for a vote.
Most bills advance on a voice vote, but divisions are often called and a show of hands may decide a bill’s fate. Any member may request an oral roll call on any bill before it goes to the floor. If an oral roll call is requested, the Deputy Secretary calls the name of each member of the Rules Committee who votes “aye” or “nay” on the bill in question, and announces the total vote. The Chair then announces the fate of the bill. If a member attempts to pull a bill from the Green Sheet and it fails, that bill does not stay on the Green Sheet but returns to the White Sheet and begins the Rules Committee process anew. The member that requested the failed bill does not get another choice; it counts as one of their “pulls.”
A Flash Calendar is usually circulated after each Rules meeting. It includes a list of measures approved by the Rules committee to be placed on the 2nd & 3rd Reading (floor) Calendar. These measures are usually "pulled" from the Green Sheet but occasionally they are moved directly from the White Sheet to the floor calendar. The measures on the Flash Calendar are added to any remaining items on the floor calendar and a new or supplemental 2nd & 3rd Reading Calendar is created.
After certain cut-off dates, as a house-keeping measure the Senate Rules Committee sometimes places bills no longer eligible for consideration in the “X-File”. This removes them from calendars, and the daily status sheet, keeping those lists from becoming too long and unwieldy. They usually remain in the X-File until the end of the biennium.
The vast majority of bills are placed on the Senate floor calendar through the two step process of being pulled from the White Sheet to the Green Sheet and then from the Green Sheet to the floor calendar. However, a “package pull,” or a list of bills voted to the floor calendar together on a single vote, is sometimes voted out. This is done on rare occasions, usually before a cutoff or the end of session, or when the Senate is going to act on one topic addressed by several bills.
The Rules Committee determines the order in which bills are placed on the floor calendar. Usually this is in the order in which they are pulled out of the Rules Committee. Formally known as the 2nd and 3rd Reading Calendar, the Senate floor calendar is traditionally printed on yellow paper and commonly referred to as the yellow calendar.
Gubernatorial Appointments (GAs) move through the Rules Committee in the same manner as bills. These appointments are usually placed on a Gubernatorial Appointments Calendar which is also printed on yellow paper, but single GAs sometimes appear on the regular yellow calendar together with other measures.
Occasionally, the Committee will create a consent calendar composed of bills that have unanimous or near-unanimous support (with little or no opposition). These bills can come from either the White or Green Sheets and are placed on a separate Consent Calendar for the floor. The consent calendar is traditionally pink in color and is commonly referred to as the pink calendar.

Good info. Stephen....I have no idea where you found all of that...but good job!

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

The Washington State Senate had 1195 bills introduced this session. Out of those, 611 have been sent on to the Rules Committee.

There are currently 509 on the White Sheet.

An additional 102 have been moved to the Green sheet at this time. They are eligible to go directly to the floor.

The current legislation, SB 5778 is on the Green sheet and will most likely be voted on by the Rules Committee.

It appears to be moving along with some speed.