State House committee considers curb of light pollution

Rep. Jessyn Farrell

When a bill aimed at curbing light pollution in the State of Washington received a hearing before the House Environment Committee yesterday in Olympia it was the first formal discussion of the topic at the state level in seven years. House Bill 2057 would direct the state Department of Ecology to assess the environmental, economic, and public health effects of light pollution, and to submit the study and policy recommendations for reducing light pollution to the Legislature by next January.

Rep. Jessyn Farrell, D-Seattle, is the prime sponsor of the legislation.

“This is a really important issue,” Farrell said. “There are lots of studies that do show that there is an impact on human health, the natural environment, property values” from light pollution. “The goal here is to study this and see what the current state of that research is.”

Amateur astronomers testify

Farrell said the issue was brought to her by a constituent, David Dorais, who in testimony before the committee described himself as, “a former traffic engineer who knows something about outdoor lighting, especially for street use and safety. As a lifelong amateur astronomer I also know something about how we can do a much better job of illuminating those places throughout the state that need the banishment of the dark.”

L-R: David Dorais, Qiu Min Ji, and David Ingram testified
in favor of HB 2057 at a hearing of the state House
 Environment Committee on Jan. 12, 2016. Photo: Greg Scheiderer.

David Ingram, a volunteer who heads up Dark Skies Northwest, the local chapter of the International Dark-Sky Association, called the night sky a natural resource and a wonderment.

“It has inspired architecture, religion, philosophy, science and technology,” Ingram testified. “I don’t know how our young people are going to be similarly inspired if more than half of them don’t even have a contact with the night sky.”

“It’s of vital importance that we look at the question of what happens to the soul of men and women when they’re removed from contact with the night sky,” Ingram said. He added that he doesn’t want to go back to the dark ages, but believes we have the technology to use light to enhance safety, wayfinding, and commerce efficiently and effectively, without blotting out all of the stars in the process.

Amendments likely

There will probably be some changes to the bill before the committee votes on it. Jessica Archer, who is with the scientific arm of the Department of Ecology, suggested that the departments of Health, Fish and Wildlife, and Commerce be brought in on the study, as Ecology lacks the expertise to weigh in on light pollution’s impact on animals, human health, or property values. Archer also suggested that the scope of the study be more clearly spelled out, which will also help them determine the cost of the effort. Farrell said that she might seek to add potential cost savings to the scope of the study. It’s also possible that the deadline for the study will be pushed out; the due date of January 1, 2017 was set when the bill was first drafted last year.

Farrell noted that HB 2057 takes a far more cautious approach than did fairly comprehensive and directive light pollution legislation that was considered in 2008 and 2009. Mark Johnson, representing the Washington Retail Association, testified that his organization wanted to make sure that any consideration of light pollution didn’t have an adverse impact on safety or business. That’s a reason why Farrell went with a deliberate approach.

“I think we should study this and see if there’s further action that we should take,” she said.

Next steps

The bill must gain the approval of the committee by Feb. 5 if it is to come up for a vote in by the entire House. Our hunch is that the supporters have a good chance to accomplish that. The committee chair, Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon, D-Seattle, is a co-sponsor of the bill. Another member of the committee, Rep. Joan McBride, D-Kirkland, was involved in improving lighting ordinances when she was mayor of that city.

Interested people who were unable to attend Tuesday’s hearing can testify about the bill online. This makes a difference. Write today!

More information:

• Text of HB 2057
• House staff summary of HB 2057
• Bill history page
• Our coverage of the bill’s introduction last year
• Our coverage of the tabling of the bill

Proposal to study light pollution switched off

Less than two weeks after it was formally introduced in the Washington State House of Representatives, a bill that would have directed the state Department of Ecology to study light pollution and recommend possible remedies appears to be off the table for this year’s session.

Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon, chair of the state House
Environment Committee, did not schedule a
hearing on the light-pollution study bill.

The measure, HB 2057 sponsored by Rep. Jessyn Farrell of north Seattle, was referred to the House Environment Committee, but did not receive a hearing. Last Friday, February 20, was the Legislature’s self-imposed deadline for having bills out of committee if they are to be eligible for further consideration.

While the bill may be dead the idea is not necessarily so. Occasionally, bills can be revived through parliamentary procedures, or they can be amended onto other measures, though neither of those possibilities seem likely in this case. The directive could be attached as a proviso to the Department of Ecology budget. Were that to happen, we would not likely know about it until the budget proposals start coming out in a month or so.

If nothing happens for the rest of this year’s session, the bill will be automatically re-introduced again for the 2016 legislative session, though the timeline for the study would likely be pushed back a year as well if the measure is considered at that time.

It is difficult to gauge how serious the effort is to take a close look at light pollution in the state. Neither the prime sponsor of the bill, Rep. Farrell, nor the Environment Committee chair, Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon of West Seattle, have responded to Seattle Astronomy’s requests for information.

We will keep you posted if we learn more.

Washington Legislature considering study of light pollution

Rep. Jessyn Farrell of Seattle is the prime 

sponsor of a bill calling for a study of light 

pollution in Washington.

A bill has been introduced in the Washington State House of Representatives that would direct the state Department of Ecology to conduct a study of light pollution in the state and to make recommendations for reducing it.

The measure, HB 2057, is sponsored by Rep. Jessyn Farrell, a Democrat from Seattle. It has been referred to the House Environment committee, the chair of which, Democratic Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon of West Seattle, is a co-sponsor of the bill.

The bill is a simple one, just over a page long. It directs the department to “analyze the current extent of light pollution that adversely affects the quality of the environment, the value of property, and the health and well-being of the public.” It specifies that the study must evaluate, at a minimum:

• The risks to public health, well-being, and the environment posed by light pollution
• The locations in the state with the greatest prevalence of light pollution and the greatest impacts of light pollution on environmental quality, ecosystem function, and public well-being
• Policy options for addressing light pollution that have been adopted by other jurisdictions

The department would be required to report the results of the study back to the Legislature by Jan. 1, 2017, and include recommendations for policy changes to address light pollution.

This is the first legislative look at light pollution in the state in six years. Rep. Pat Lantz, a Gig Harbor Democrat who has since retired from the Legislature, introduced a far-reaching light pollution statute in 2008, and Rep. Sam Hunt, D-Olympia, proposed a similar measure the following year. The latter earned committee approval in 2009 but never came to a vote in the House of Representatives. The earlier measures would have required that all new lighting be fully shielded, and would have banned the sale and use of mercury vapor lights, among other considerations. It had strong support within the astronomy and environmental communities, but drew opposition from a variety of developers, sports teams, billboard operators, and gas stations. The state Department of Transportation warned that the cost of bringing highway lighting up to the new code would have been prohibitive.

The Legislature’s website includes the text of HB 2057 as well as the capability to comment online. Seattle Astronomy will continue to follow the measure, which must gain committee approval by Feb. 20 if it is to be eligible for continued consideration this year.