This bill creates a new, self‑supported statewide tourism assessment program administered by the Washington tourism marketing authority and adds a new chapter to Title 43 RCW. It authorizes annual assessments levied as a percentage of gross revenue on defined tourism businesses (lodging, travel services, attractions, recreation, beverage producers, and high‑revenue full‑service restaurants and retailers), but assessments do not begin until a required referendum process is completed and ratified. The authority must adopt implementing rules (excluding federally recognized tribes and tribal businesses unless they opt in), appoint a ratepayer oversight board made up of assessed business representatives to design the assessment structure and budget, and the authority (with the commerce director’s review) may approve or reject the board’s annual budget but may not independently amend board proposals. The bill establishes two accounts: a tourism assessment account (moneys collected are not state money, are not subject to legislative appropriation, and must be used solely for tourism promotion) and a tourism assessment program reimbursement account to receive reimbursements for implementation and operation costs; the reimbursement account is under the state treasurer and subject to allotment procedures. The department of commerce serves as fiscal agent until June 30, 2030. The authority may contract for a statewide tourism marketing plan (including with a statewide nonprofit), cap administrative expenses at 2% of the state portion of funds in any fiscal year, require audits, and carry out enforcement: unpaid assessments are a personal debt, the authority may add up to 10% for enforcement costs, and may bring civil actions to collect. The authority initially pays referendum costs and is reimbursed from assessments. The bill also reenacts and amends RCW 42.56.270 to expand confidentiality exemptions for financial, commercial, and proprietary information submitted to the authority and the ratepayer oversight board, limits liability so obligations are enforceable only against the authority’s or board’s assets (with no personal liability for members except for dishonesty or crime), and sets various procedural and appointment rules for boards and advisory groups. Extracted materials are incomplete on several points: the exact assessment methodology and rates, any opt‑out provisions, the program term length and reauthorization or termination procedures, the detailed distribution of "remaining funds" referenced in Sec. 7(2), full text of the amendments to the cited RCWs, and the new chapter number are not provided in the extracted facts.

If enacted, the bill would let the Washington tourism marketing authority set up a self-funded statewide tourism promotion program paid for by an annual assessment on specified tourism businesses (lodging, travel services, attractions, recreation, beverage producers, and high-revenue full‑service restaurants and retailers) only after sector-by-sector referenda. A ratepayer oversight board made up of assessed businesses would design the assessment structure, propose the budget, meet quarterly, commission audits, and its budget recommendations must be approved (or rejected) by the authority with director review; the authority gets a dedicated tourism assessment account that is not state money and can use the funds to hire a statewide nonprofit for marketing, while administrative expenses are capped at 2% of the state portion of funds. Federally recognized tribes and businesses on tribal land are excluded unless they opt in, financial and commercial submissions are kept confidential, and nonpayment can lead to civil collection actions plus up to a 10% enforcement charge. The most affected parties are the listed tourism businesses, which would likely face a new recurring cost proportional to gross revenue if their sector ratifies the assessment, and must participate in weighted referenda; the tourism authority and the ratepayer oversight board would gain responsibility for program implementation, contracting, and budget oversight with audits and limited liability tied to their assets. The department of commerce serves as fiscal agent through mid-2030 and the authority initially pays referendum and department costs (later reimbursed from assessments). Key operational details that would materially affect outcomes—exact assessment rates and methodology, how funds are distributed, any opt-out rules, program term length, and distribution of remaining funds—are not specified in the provided text and remain uncertain.