Essential information on each bill is below. For more details, click on the bill number – e.g., “SB 5000.” The new page will show the progress of the bill, videos of debate, and the link to send a comment to your legislator about the bill.
-
Education
Extending special education services to students with disabilities until the end of the school year in which the student turns 22.
Bill Summary
Senate Bill 5253 seeks to extend special education services for students with disabilities until the end of the school year in which they turn 22 years old, amending several sections of Washington state law to align with federal regulations. It recognizes that the current policy of discontinuing services at age 21 may violate federal mandates for free appropriate public education for children with disabilities aged 3 to 21. The new provisions require the continuation of special education services for eligible students until they reach 22, ensuring that they receive necessary support during critical transitional periods. Additionally, the bill emphasizes collaboration among state agencies to enhance transition planning activities for students likely to become eligible for services from the Developmental Disabilities Administration.
Key amendments include redefining the age range for special education services from “between the ages of three and twenty-one” to “beginning at three years of age and concluding at the end of the school year in which the resident turns 22 years of age.” The bill also mandates that school districts obtain consent before releasing student information and expands educational programs to include students with disabilities. Furthermore, it establishes rules for waiving fees for preadmission screening based on family income and allows school districts to deny admission to adjudicated sex offenders under certain conditions. The updated implementation plan is required to be completed by October 30, 2026, with the transition planning section set to expire on August 1, 2027.
-
Health Care
Implementing state auditor recommendations for reducing improper medicaid concurrent enrollment payments.
Bill Summary
Senate Bill 5258 aims to implement recommendations from the state auditor to reduce improper Medicaid concurrent enrollment payments in Washington. It introduces several new sections which require collaboration between the authority and the department to notify each other when individuals enrolled in both Medicaid and other income-based programs move out of state. Additionally, the authority is tasked with working alongside federal agencies to clarify eligibility determinations for clients receiving social security income and to ensure that caseworkers are trained to prevent concurrent enrollments in multiple Medicaid programs. The bill also mandates that managed care organizations analyze their enrollment records monthly to identify individuals enrolled in multiple state Medicaid programs and report these findings to the authority.
Furthermore, the bill outlines specific actions to be taken starting January 1, 2026, including amending contracts with managed care organizations to allow the state to recover premiums for enrollees who have moved out of Washington and have not received services. An annual report detailing the premiums recovered and the number of individuals identified as concurrently enrolled will be submitted to the governor and relevant legislative committees. By December 31, 2031, the state auditor is required to conduct a performance audit on concurrent Medicaid enrollments to assess costs and progress in limiting unnecessary premiums. The bill also amends existing law to ensure that notices regarding program eligibility are clear and meet established plain language guidelines.
Bill Summary
SB 5263 represents a substantial commitment to special education funding, addressing a long-standing issue in Washington’s K-12 system. The bill is a compromise between the Senate Majority Leader and Senate Minority Leader and would add nearly $1 billion in new spending for special education in the 2025-27 biennium. The substitute version of this bill is estimated to save the state between $400 – 500 million over the next four years. However, concerns about accountability and long-term sustainability remain. If passed, lawmakers should consider future audits or reporting measures to ensure that funds are used effectively and equitably across districts. Historically, Washington’s special education system has been underfunded for years, forcing school districts to utilize local levies just to meet legal requirements. Special education services such as individualized instruction, speech therapy, physical therapy and behavioral support require significant resources which the increased funding could support. When local property tax levies are required to fund special education, it creates inequality between wealthy and less affluent districts. This bill would ensure that every special education student, regardless of where they live, has access to the specialized services they need. Furthermore, ensuring adequate funding means Washington is complying with federal education laws and can also reduce drop-out rates while improving career readiness for students with disabilities.
Sen. Chris Gildon, R-Puyallup, introduced an amendment to the substitute bill that would have added a performance audit to ensure special education dollars are spent effectively, but sadly, the amendment failed. While we believe adequate management and accountability are critically important in a state where billions of dollars are unaccounted for, it is important not to further delay funding for students who have urgently needed support for years. While we are not supporters of the public school system, we understand that home schools and charter schools rarely have the infrastructure and funds to support the needs of special education students. While this legislation is certainly not perfect, it is a step in the right direction for making special education funding more reliable statewide and the bill has good bipartisan support.
Bill Summary
Senate Bill 5266 modifies the state’s approach to juvenile sentencing and early release eligibility. Individuals convicted of crimes committed before their 18th birthday can petition the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board (ISRB) for early release upon reaching the age of 24, provided they meet specific criteria. If they’re granted release, the murderer or other serious felon would be provided rental vouchers courtesy of taxpayers. But the bill does not specify for how long rental vouchers could be offered, meaning they could be provided indefinitely.Those convicted of three or more murder offenses must serve at least 20 years before petitioning. In review, the bill would release juvenile killers from jail early — so long as they didn’t kill more than two victims, the apparent threshold for Democratic sympathy — and then give them free rent to live in your neighborhood.
The primary sponsor for the bill is State Sen. Noel Frame (D-Seattle), who said this “is about accountability.” How? Frame doesn’t explain; however, she did say that it’s not fair for a juvenile murderer to have to wait the current 20 years before being considered for release. Supporters claim rigorous risk assessments and rehabilitative programs will keep the community safe. How can this be considered a good idea? Progressives argue we need more compassion and fewer consequences, but compassion shouldn’t mean naiveté—especially when it endangers the community. But, SB 5266 isn’t compassionate—it’s reckless. Too many supposedly “rehabilitated” offenders have reoffended, and this bill risks repeating those tragic failures
Even some Democrats are opposed to this legislation. Rep. Lauren Davis, D-Shoreline stated “Civil society has expectations around the appropriate punishment for taking a life. This legislation would allow a person to leave prison as soon as six years after killing somebody. The bill allows these early releases even for people convicted of two homicides. So, that’s three years per murder. That is just not objectively reasonable.” When a critic noted that this process would mean a family would be put in a position to ask a board to deny the petition of the monster who murdered their daughter just a few years earlier, expecting they’d serve the 20-year sentence imposed on them, Frame had the temerity to remind people that family members aren’t forced to testify at all, so it’s not really that much of a burden. Does that sound compassionate? Perhaps Frame should be the one to contact families and explain to them they have the option to be retraumatized thanks to her tireless efforts to release murderers and child molesters. After all, as Frame pointed out, the criminals apologized for their crime so they should be given another chance.
The bill is based on the argument that full “brain development” does not occur until the approximate age of 24. Democrats pretend a juvenile doesn’t recognize it’s wrong to murder people until 24, though in Washington they say a 13-year-old can start to transition to a different gender without parental consent. Legislators should protect communities, not gamble with public safety to score ideological points. Offering offenders taxpayer-subsidized housing vouchers and early release is neither justice nor mercy. It’s an invitation for tragedy—and unfortunately, the public pays the price while Democrats campaign off their supposed compassion for juvenile offenders who “just made a careless mistake.” Please oppose this reprehensible legislation.
Bill Summary
Senate Bill 5268 is a Republican bill that amends existing laws regarding community custody sentences for offenders convicted of certain crimes, specifically focusing on unlawful possession of a firearm. It establishes that offenders sentenced for unlawful possession of a firearm under will receive a community custody sentence of one year if they are sentenced to the custody of the department. Additionally, if the offender is sentenced for a violent offense that is not classified as a serious violent offense, the court must impose an 18-month community custody term. The bill also clarifies that if the unlawful possession of a firearm offense results in a prison sentence of more than one year, the offender will also receive an 18-month community custody sentence.
The bill includes a new section that specifies an expiration date of January 1, 2026, for the provisions outlined in Section 1, while Section 2 will take effect on the same date. This creates a timeline for the implementation of the new community custody requirements and ensures that the changes are reviewed after a set period. Overall, the bill aims to enhance public safety by imposing stricter community custody requirements for offenders involved in firearm-related offenses. Please support this legislation that has strong bipartisan support.