‘WHY DID YOU DO WHAT YOU DID?’: Respected ferry advocate confronts Senate Transportation Committee for approving ‘drastically different’ version of “Mosquito Fleet Act’
by Jeff Noedel
Thursday, March 5, 2026. 11:00 a.m.
Celebration was short-lived after powerful, and nearly universally supportive testimony Friday for “2S (second substitute) H.B. 1923, “The Mosquito Fleet Act” in the State Senate Transportation Committee chaired by Sen. Marko Liias, Democrat of Mukilteo.
Dozens of Washingtonians — from leaders of local communities to maritime transit industry experts to regular riders of Kitsap Transit’s Fast Ferries — testified in support of the bill. A TVW recording of that hearing is here; the hearing begins at 1:50:25.
H.B. 1923 was one of 10 bills which had already passed the House of Representatives, and hope was high for committee passage in the committee voting Monday at 1:30 p.m. Since executive session is not designed to take additional input from the public, the process is quick and efficient. No citizen observers were visible in the room during the Monday executive session.
Typically in government and boards of directors, the term executive session means a meeting held in private, but in the Washington legislature, executive sessions are held in public.
Working their way through the 10 bills, they focused their attention to H.B. 1923 one hour and 23 minutes into the meeting. Four minutes later, the Senate committee’s version of H.B. 1923 was significantly different from the bill prime sponsor State Rep. Greg Nance (Democrat of Bainbridge Island) has been campaigning for, and lining up statewide support for over the past 1-1/2 years.
Importantly, the public, the industry experts, and the local leaders had no chance to address the new substitute “striker” bill presented on Monday.
A TVW recording of the Monday executive session is here; the portion of the meeting devoted to The Mosquito Fleet Act begins at 1:23:48.
The substitute bill was written by Chair Liias. He called his changes “thoughtful sideboards,” implying his changes were tweaks and minor improvements. In fact, Liias’ substitute comprised 14 changes, some of them fundamentally modifying the bill.
“The role of our committee process is to hear public testimony and incorporate these ideas into the bills we pass. That is exactly what has happened here.“
MARKO LIIAS, SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE CHAIR
A committee staffer read off short summaries of each of the 14 changes. No Senator asked any questions or spoke in opposition to the substitute. After a break, the Senate Transportation Committee came back into Executive Session and passed Liias’ substitute. There were some no votes for his bill, but he deemed the majority of the committee had voted yes.
On a Friday, a robust hearing was held for a bill that had been vetted and approved by the House of Representatives through two sessions. On the next Monday, a completely different substitute bill passed the Senate committee, with virtually no input from stakeholders on the 14 changes.
Peter Philips is CEO of COLIBRI Northwest and was one of three dozen supporters who testified last week to the Senate Transportation Committee on H.B. 1923, “The Mosquito Fleet Act.” Philips is widely considered to be an expert in local passenger ferries.
Philips did not watch the executive session on Monday afternoon. On Tuesday morning, a lobbyist called Philips and told him to look at the bill. “It’s way different,” Philips recalled being told in an interview with CNL3 yesterday.
Following is the content of the email that Philips then sent to 17 members — Democrats and Republicans — on the State Senate Transportation Committee:
From: Peter Philips
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2026 7:48 AM
Good morning Senator Liias and other members of the Senate Transportation Committee,
I am confused and frustrated that the bill that left your committee is so drastically different from the bill that entered it.
The Mosquito Fleet Act that entered your committee was a good bill for everybody: minimal fiscal impact to the state, encouraging local communities to act on their own to solve their own problems, and providing hundreds of in-state family wage shipyard jobs from Vancouver to Anacortes. The vessels these shipyards would deliver in-state are quiet and clean, so much better for marine mammals than other on-water craft.
Because it is such a good bill, 1923 was supported by virtually everybody that testified before you on Friday. More than 160 supported it. 6 opposed it.
As legislators looking out for the welfare of the state, you must have strong feelings to take such unpopular action which will anger such a broad swath of the population. Why did you do what you did? What constituency are you supporting with these changes?
Thank you for your prompt response. I will be speaking to many in the media who will be asking me these questions.
Peter Philips
WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES IN LIIAS’ STRIKER AMENDMENT?
The 14 “thoughtful sideboards” Liias wrote into the substitute include major changes from the bill that was the focus of the Friday hearing. Following is a list of the 14 changes, as provided by the committee staff and disclosed at the bottom of the 8-page substitute bill:
• Removes authority for regional transit authorities to create a passenger-only ferry service district.
• Limits the number of districts an entity can create to one district.
• Requires governing bodies of current and new districts to include two additional voting members: One member from a labor organization and one transit-using member.
• Expands ferry investment plan requirements to include the disclosure of per-passenger subsidy needed to provide passenger-only ferry service.
• Requires districts established after December 31, 2027, to submit the ferry investment plan to all local governments and taxing Code Rev/AI:jlb 7 S-5544.8/26 8th draftdistricts impacted by the plan, as well as to an independent consultant, prior to submitting the plan to district voters.
• Makes districts ineligible for state funding beginning in 2028.
• Requires vessels constructed for use by a district established after December 31, 2027, to: (1) Be constructed under the terms of a project labor agreement; (2) be constructed in Washington state; (3) be a zero-emissions vessel; and (4) operate in compliance with the quiet sound program and follow safe whale distance guidelines.
• Requires fare policies meet certain requirements.
• Limits the use of sales and use tax to districts in existence on the effective date of the bill.
• Allows districts to impose a property tax.
• Makes technical changes to conform with “setting forth in full” requirements.
• Adds procedures including following the duties of vessels in interactions with southern resident killer whales (SRKW) to prevent ship strikes and minimize disturbance of SRKW and other cetaceans.
• Directs Passenger-only ferry districts and ferry operators to consult with the Governor’s Salmon Recovery office on best practices to limit disturbances to the SRKWs.
• Requires passenger-only ferry service routes to be categorized by purpose and need, and must minimize disturbances to SRKW and other cetaceans.
Asked which are the three changes Philips objects to most, he responded:
- The Build-in-Washington requirement is the worst change in the bill, he said. Philips said such a requirement is unnecessary since so many vessels are already built in Washington. However, putting such a requirement in the law could cost local ferry districts millions in Federal funds. He said it was ironic in that Washington recently amended the law to permit WSF to buy vessels built anywhere in the U.S.
- Philips said the second-worst change is Liias’ bill’s prohibition against cross-district collaboration.
- Third worst, according to Philips, is the prohibition on any assistance from the state, and the removal of the option for districts to rely on an incremental local sales tax for funding.
Philips told CNL3 “The Liias proposal would prohibit local communities from acting independently to solve transportation issues that state cannot solve for them. We must ask: Why would the legislature do that?”
On Wednesday, Liias did respond to Philips’ email blast. Here is the text of Liias’ response, in two parts:
From: Liias, Sen. Marko <Marko.Liias@leg.wa.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2026 10:03 AM
Thanks for your note. I am interested to hear which of the changes made in the Senate committee you are opposed to or have concerns about? That will help me address why that particular change was made.
It is typical in the legislative process for changes to be made to bills to address feedback from the public and other interested parties. Last year, the bill did not advance from committee because of a number of concerns. I was pleased that we were able to get support for an amendment to address concerns and keep the bill moving.
Thanks,
Marko
And then, a follow-up email from Sen. Liias:, which — after the fact — will serve as the closest thing to a public hearing on the “Liias substitute.”
From: Liias, Sen. Marko <Marko.Liias@leg.wa.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2026 10:03 AM
Thanks for sharing your concerns. I appreciate your passion and energy for new passenger ferries, it is commendable that you support new transportation options for folks.
Over my 18 years in the Legislature, we have created many different kinds of new local option taxing districts and each of those cases, the Legislature worked to ensure there were common-sense limitations on how new taxing powers are exercised. In our Transportation Benefit District statute, we ensure that taxpayers aren’t asked to pay overlapping taxes, that language was the inspiration for ensuring that multiple passenger ferry districts don’t overlap and create unduly high taxes for individuals. Our transit districts have labor and transit user board members that help the board hear worker and community voice, that was the inspiration for similar language here. When the Legislature authorized tax-increment financing authority for local governments, we required local jurisdictions to confer with other local agencies that could be impacted to ensure that there are not unintended consequences for forming a new area, that was the inspiration for the local consultation mechanism in the bill.
In the prime sponsor’s testimony, Rep. Nance spoke of the vision of reinvigorating our local shipbuilding industry through new passenger vessels. You will undoubtedly remember that when Kitsap Transit started the Fast Ferry, the very first vessels were purchased from out state, which did not give our local builders the opportunity to participate. That is why we have included a Build in Washington requirement, to ensure that this work—and the taxes that pay for it—benefit our local communities. In 2018, the Legislature committed to transitioning our fleet to hybrid electric, to reduce emissions and protect air quality in our shoreline communities. It would make little sense to allow a proliferation of new diesel vessels as we work to reduce emissions. And we heard significant testimony in committee about the potential negative impacts of new passenger vessels on our endangered orca, so applying whale safety policies that are already law seems prudent and balanced.
I also want to be sure to address your concerns about sales taxes. Our state as the 2ndmost regressive tax system in the nation, driven in large part by our overreliance on sales taxes. This tax system places an undue burden on poor and working class families to pay for our shared infrastructure. Doubling down on this unfair, upside down, and regressive system is not good tax policy, nor is it fair for the people who need good transportation options and an affordable place to live. Existing county passenger ferry districts are allowed to utilize a property tax, that is why it made sense to extend the same tool here. The property tax is not regressive and it includes the senior and veteran exemption program to ensure the impacts don’t unduly burden folks. In addition, these districts can also use parking taxes and fares, so there are still diverse revenue tools available.
In closing, the role of the legislative process is to ensure that the laws we pass achieve the policy goals they set, and that new laws are harmonized and consistent with the laws already enacted. The role of our committee process is to hear public testimony and incorporate these ideas into the bills we pass. That is exactly what has happened here. I heard a lot of enthusiasm for passenger ferries, that is why we worked diligently to conform this bill to match existing laws and policies. In this way, we can create a strong, coordinated, and effective transportation system for everyone in our state.
I am not sure we will see eye to eye on this one, but I wanted to be sure you had all the information we were considering as we continue our work on this bill.
Thanks,
Marko
As it stands, with few days left in the 2026 Supplemental Session and the legislature spending much of its home-stretch energy on major tax debates, there is little time to reconcile the substantial differences between what the State House of Representatives passed with a strong bipartisan majority and Liias’ substitute.
And if the bill doesn’t pass the full Senate or does pass but fails to be reconciled between the version passed by the House, then this will be the second year in a row that the popular bill dies at the hands of the Senate Transportation Committee, despite strong bipartisan support in the State House.
Now, Liias has revealed the version of “The Mosquito Fleet Act” he is willing to support.
After the fact.
And it may have come too late in the process for the bill’s many supporters to absorb, negotiate, and to support. And that’s why some supporters wonder if killing the bill was the goal.
