House Bill 2353 (69th Legislature, 2026) makes procedural changes to state capital project planning and oversight by amending RCW 43.88.110, RCW 43.82.035, and RCW 43.88.0301 and by creating an additional section (text of the new section and some amendments are not shown in the extracted facts). The bill raises the major capital construction project predesign review threshold to $15,000,000 (replacing $10,000,000) and requires the Office of Financial Management (OFM) to adopt predesign-stage review procedures for projects above that threshold. Required review elements include evaluation of facility program requirements and long-range plan consistency, use of cost/quality/performance standards, value-engineering analysis, and constructability review scheduled into the project. Beginning July 1, 2027, OFM must annually adjust the $15,000,000 threshold to reflect the C-100 form’s inflation factor (the C-100 factor is referenced but not defined in the extracted facts). The bill establishes procedural controls and reporting for exceptions: OFM may waive some or all predesign requirements, but must report any exception to the legislative fiscal committees with a project description, explanation for the waiver, and a rough order of magnitude cost estimate, and must consider enumerated factors when deciding on waivers. OFM may propose a professional project cost estimate in lieu of predesign funding when requirements are waived. The bill also prohibits expenditures or obligations for major capital construction projects (including land, site work, predesign, design, construction, and equipment) until OFM approves the allotment of funds; projects may continue into the next biennium only if allotments were approved in the immediate prior biennium. The bill creates a modified predesign process for agency space requests to lease, purchase, or build facilities that house new state programs, are major expansions, or relocate/ consolidate programs. Agencies must submit modified predesigns to OFM and the legislature with a problem statement, alternatives analysis, proposed locations, and a financial assessment; agencies proposing projects of 20,000 gross square feet or less may provide a cost-benefit analysis instead of a life-cycle cost analysis as determined by OFM. OFM must require agencies to identify plans for major leased facilities in the ten-year capital plan and may not allow new or renewed leases over $1,000,000 per year without OFM approval except for unanticipated emergencies (the regular termination date of an existing lease is not an emergency). OFM will also require yes/no responses to specific informational questions during predesign for projects over the threshold—questions about consistency with local comprehensive plans and urban growth areas, regional coordination, local funding leverage, and environmental outcomes—and must include chapter 39.116 RCW information in capital budget instructions beginning with the 2025–2027 biennium. The Office of Community Development is directed to provide staff support to OFM and applicants for the required data. The extracted material shows several context gaps: the full text of the amendment to RCW 43.88.0301 and the new section are not provided; one sentence in RCW 43.82.035 is truncated; the C-100 form and its inflation factor are referenced but not defined here; and the Secretary of State approval date is not shown.

If enacted, the bill will push more capital projects into formal predesign review by raising the dollar threshold to $15 million and giving OFM authority to require detailed program, location, cost, constructability and value-engineering reviews, plus answers to local planning and environmental coordination questions. State agencies that propose large construction projects or significant changes in leased space will likely face longer upfront planning, extra reporting, and higher preconstruction costs and time before money can be spent, because OFM must approve allotments and can require professional cost estimates or deny waivers; agencies will also need OFM sign-off to start or renew leases over $1,000,000 per year except for true emergencies, which reduces agencies’ leasing flexibility. The practical burden and control shifts toward OFM — more review work, more decision points, and reporting to legislative fiscal committees when waivers are granted — while local planning alignment and coordination are more explicitly required, which could reduce unplanned infrastructure impacts if followed. Key implementation details are missing from the provided text (for example, the C-100 inflation factor definition, the full amendments to RCW 43.88.0301, and a truncated notification provision), so how thresholds are precisely adjusted and how some procedures would be executed is unclear.