This bill amends RCW 36.57A.050 to set specific rules for selecting and composing public transportation benefit area (PTBA) governing bodies. It requires county legislative authorities and city representatives to select a PTBA governing body within 60 days of establishing PTBA boundaries, limits board size to a maximum of 11 voting members for single-county PTBAs and 17 for multicounty PTBAs, and specifies that the governing body be made up primarily of elected officials (with limits on how many officials a single city or county may have). Cities may withdraw from participation within the 60-day period, and citizen members on existing transit boards may be retained when a PTBA assumes interlocal functions. The bill creates new member categories and procedures: it authorizes up to two transit-using voting members with defined eligibility (one who primarily relies on public transportation and another who represents a community-based organization and at least occasionally uses transit, with fallback rules if no such representative is available), requires a nonvoting labor-recommended member where employees are unionized, requires accessible meeting times/places and training for transit-using members on open meetings, public records, and municipal ethics, and allows cities excluded from direct membership to designate authorized representatives. It also sets member compensation and reimbursement rules (per diem base up to $44/day, up to $90 by resolution, limits of 75 paid days per year for members and 100 for a chair, travel reimbursement per state law), directs OFM to adjust dollar thresholds for inflation every five years beginning January 1, 2024, adds a special selection rule for certain large counties west of the Cascades, repeals RCW 47.66.170 (public transportation benefit area grant program eligibility) and an associated 2025 session law provision, and declares the act an emergency effective immediately. Legally, the measure is primarily an organizational and procedural change to existing PTBA law: it changes how governing boards are formed and composed, adds membership categories and training requirements, adjusts compensation rules, and repeals a prior statutory provision. The provided material does not include the prior text of the referenced 2025 statute or the full text of the repealed RCW 47.66.170, and the county population and geographic determinations referenced (for the special selection rule) depend on external data not included here.

If enacted, counties and cities creating a public transportation benefit area must pick the new governing board within 60 days and will face clear limits on board size, how many elected officials can serve, and rules to try to distribute representation by population (with a special cap in certain large west-side counties). Up to two designated transit riders and one nonvoting labor representative become part of the board structure, meetings must be reasonably accessible by transit when riders serve, and those rider members must get specific training. Member pay is capped (base per diem set with a local option to raise it, and limits on payable days per year), and the Office of Financial Management will adjust dollar thresholds for inflation every five years. The act takes effect immediately. The most affected parties are county legislative authorities and city councils who must act quickly and may need to change who represents smaller cities or unincorporated areas; transit riders and community-based organizations that qualify can gain real voting influence and voice but must meet the use or representation criteria; labor organizations get a formal nonvoting seat; and transit agencies and their employees may see different oversight and meeting rules. These changes will add some administrative work and modest training and accessibility costs, may shift political influence on transit decisions, and could limit how many officials are eligible for per diem pay. The bill also repeals a provision tied to public transportation grant eligibility, but the text of that repealed section is not provided here, so the practical funding impact of that repeal is unclear.