This Seattle Democrat doesn't know all that's best for our side of WA

Yahoo

18-05-2025

Washington Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, blocked a bill that would have helped the Tri-Cities secure billions in economic investment and more than 1,000 jobs. A Seattle-based state leader thinks he knows what is best for this side of the Cascade Mountains.
House Bill 1210, sponsored by Rep. Stephanie Barnard, R-Pasco, was close to passage. It had already passed the House with bipartisan support and was heading toward a floor vote in the Senate in the waning days of the legislative session.
The bill would have modified the rules for Targeted Urban Areas. TUAs are areas that local governments create to lure manufacturing and industrial development with temporary property tax breaks. Businesses commit to investing in improvements and creating living wage jobs.
Richland was the first city to create a TUA. It includes the Northwest Advanced Clean Energy Park, the Horn Rapids Industrial Park and the Richland Airport.
Richland's Targeted Urban Area attracted several projects, among them proposals by Framatome Inc. and Washington Energy LLC. The two companies operate in the nuclear power industry. Framatome already has facilities in the area and planned to spend $375 million expanding its nuclear fuel plant. Washington Energy, meanwhile, is considering building a $3 billion nuclear fuel plant.
These companies are poised to play a significant role in the future of nuclear fuel production, a sector where the Tri-Cities possess expertise and infrastructure thanks to its history with the Hanford site and the presence of the Columbia Generating Station.
The hitch is that state law sets a timeline for businesses in a TUA to deliver their projects and the accompanying jobs. The tax breaks last for a decade, but only on projects completed in five years or less. That's fine for a lot of businesses, but nuclear fuel companies face a lengthy federal approval process from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which can take years.
Barnard introduced HB 1210 to address that regulatory reality. It would have granted nuclear projects in Targeted Urban Areas up to an additional four years to receive their certification, build and hire workers.
Pedersen wasn't having it. As majority leader, he has the power to reroute a bill from a floor vote, effectively killing it, and he did just that.
Pedersen cited budget shortfalls as one reason to block the bill, but HB 1210 would not have affected state revenue. The only taxes involved are local. Richland is gambling on these companies delivering what they promise, not the state. Hopefully local leaders have done their homework and carefully thought it through.
Pedersen also expressed concern about the lack of a national nuclear waste storage facility. That view caters to nuclear-phobia among his liberal base in the Puget Sound area.
The Tri-Cities is already home to a nuclear power plant that responsibly manages its spent fuel. Moreover, Framatome, a company with a long-standing presence in Richland, demonstrated its commitment to safe operations during a recent dustup with federal regulators over nuclear materials.
To suggest that a lack of a permanent federal repository to hold nuclear waste should halt all progress in nuclear energy and manufacturing ignores the current safe storage practices.
Adding to the urgency is the need for more energy to power electric cars and digital industries as well as to replace energy generation capacity that could be lost due to dam removals. Nuclear power offers a reliable, carbon-free alternative that can produce energy 24 hours a day, unlike wind and solar.
Blocking HB 1210 was not just a setback for the Tri-Cities; it was a missed opportunity for all of Washington to embrace clean energy.
It's hard to imagine Pedersen's predecessor, Sen. Andy Billig from Spokane, pulling this same sort of aggressive legislative maneuvering on a bill that would help this side of the state.
We urge Pedersen to reconsider his stance and invite him to visit the Tri-Cities.
Firsthand engagement with this community might cultivate a deeper understanding of the nuclear expertise here and a clearer view of the economic opportunities at stake. Then, if a similar bill is introduced next year, he might at least let senators vote on it.