This bill adds a new section to chapter 46.61 RCW and amends chapter 46.55 RCW to create new procedural authority for impoundment, seizure, and forfeiture of vehicles used in attempting to elude a police vehicle (RCW 46.61.024) and certain racing and alcohol/drug-related traffic offenses. It makes vehicles used in an attempting-to-elude offense subject to impound under RCW 46.55, and, if the operator previously had a vehicle impounded for attempting to elude and is later convicted of a subsequent attempting-to-elude offense (or comparable municipal ordinance), the vehicle is subject to forfeiture after conviction and a court or administrative finding that the vehicle was used to commit the crime. Forfeiture is subject to protections for holders of perfected security interests who neither knew of nor consented to the offense at the time the security interest was created. The bill changes procedural details for seizure, notice, and retention. Seizure may occur with or without court process in specified situations (incident to lawful arrest or search, where the vehicle was already the subject of a prior forfeiture judgment in favor of the seizing agency, or where an officer has probable cause the vehicle was used or intended for use in a felony). The seizing agency must serve notice of seizure and intended forfeiture within 15 days; claimants have 60 days from seizure to file a written claim of ownership or right to possession; seizure commences forfeiture proceedings; a claimant who files may obtain an administrative hearing or remove the matter to municipal or district court and must serve process within 45 days after notifying the seizing agency. If property is forfeited, after satisfying any court-ordered victim restitution the seizing agency may retain property for official use or sell non-destroyable items and use proceeds for personnel, programs, services, and equipment related to enforcing or processing attempting-to-elude violations or to improve traffic safety. The bill also amends impoundment rules and operational procedures: it expands discretionary and summary impound grounds (including arrest for attempting to elude, certain racing statutes, lack of valid license, expired registration thresholds, and vehicles lacking required ignition interlock devices), defines a “farm transport vehicle” threshold, authorizes officers to secure a vehicle and leave it after waiting 30 minutes for tow under exigent circumstances without liability for theft or damage in specified circumstances, and establishes mandatory redemption holds for certain impounds (12-hour or 72-hour holds measured from arrival as noted in the tow operator’s master log, with registered owners who are not drivers and legal owners permitted earlier redemption). The bill creates a new section in chapter 10.21 RCW requiring electronic monitoring as a condition of release for persons charged with attempting to elude or resisting arrest, requires courts to order electronic monitoring for juveniles charged with those offenses when released on probation bond, and amends community custody and juvenile supervision statutes to add or restate supervisory and condition requirements (including a one-year community custody term listed for violation of RCW 46.61.024 and mandatory electronic monitoring for offenders sentenced for attempting to elude). The text supplied is incomplete in places: the amendment to RCW 46.55.360 is cut off, portions of the juvenile detention and related sections are truncated, definitions and some cross-referenced amendments are not provided, and several listed amendments and effective/expiration details elsewhere in the bill are not included in the extracted facts.

If enacted, police will be able to impound and ultimately seek forfeiture of vehicles used to attempt to elude officers, and those impounds carry stricter holds and faster notice timelines than ordinary tows: officers must serve notice within 15 days of seizure, owners have 60 days to file a written claim, and specific redemption holds bar a registered-owner driver from redeeming for 12 hours (certain arrests) or 72 hours (racing or attempting to elude) after the vehicle is logged into a tow operator’s master log; an officer who waits 30 minutes for a tow may secure the vehicle and leave without liability for theft or damage before tow arrival. Forfeiture can only occur after conviction and a judicial finding that the vehicle was used in the offense, secured creditors’ perfected interests are protected if they lacked knowledge/consent, and if property is forfeited the seizing agency may keep it for official use or sell it and use proceeds to fund enforcement, programs, personnel, and traffic safety efforts, shifting potential costs and revenue to law enforcement agencies and putting vehicle owners and insurers at greater risk of loss or delay of access to vehicles. The act also expands mandatory electronic monitoring and community custody for people charged with or convicted of attempting to elude or related offenses: courts must require electronic monitoring as a condition of release for adults charged with attempting to elude or resisting arrest, juvenile courts must require electronic monitoring for juveniles released on probation bond for those charges, and offenders sentenced for attempting to elude face a one-year minimum community custody term with electronic monitoring required for the duration; this increases supervision responsibilities and monitoring costs for courts, monitoring agencies, and supervising departments and gives corrections and juvenile agencies new tools and sanctions (including parole conditions, intensive supervision, and limited confinement for violations). Some implementation details and timing (including the full amendment to one impound procedure section, definitions of tow-operator master log procedures, and several cross-referenced statute changes and effective/expiration dates) are incomplete in the provided text, leaving uncertainty about operational rollout and exact timelines.