Creates a new section in chapter 71.09 RCW that requires a person or entity who purchases real property with the intent to use it as a "less restrictive alternative" under chapter 71.09 to provide written notice to specified local officials. The notice must be given after entering escrow and before closing, and must state the planned date the property will begin being used as a less restrictive alternative, the maximum number of sexually violent predators who may reside there at one time, and the names of any anticipated such residents if known. Required recipients are the county sheriff where the property is located; the state senator and each state representative of the legislative district where the property is located; the county administrator or manager; and the chair of the county commissioners or county council. A violation of the section is classified as a class 1 civil infraction under chapter 7.80 RCW. This is a procedural change that creates a new statutory notice requirement and attaches a civil infraction penalty for violating it. The text provided does not define "less restrictive alternative" or "sexually violent predators," does not specify how the written notification must be delivered or to which addresses, and does not set out enforcement procedures or the specific fines associated with a class 1 civil infraction. The provided excerpt also does not clarify the relationship between the bill title reference to owners of properties and the new-section text, which addresses purchasers.

If this becomes law, anyone buying property with the intent to use it as a "less restrictive alternative" must give a written notice after entering escrow but before closing to the county sheriff, the state senator and representatives for the district, the county administrator or manager, and the chair of the county commissioners or council. The notice must say when the property will start being used that way, the maximum number of sexually violent predators who may live there at once, and the names of any anticipated residents if known. That creates a new, time‑sensitive administrative step for buyers and adds a risk of a class 1 civil infraction if they fail to comply. The most affected people are purchasers of these properties and the listed local officials who will receive and likely have to manage the incoming notices; purchasers will face added paperwork, potential delays in closing, and the legal risk and possible costs associated with an infraction, while officials will get more advance notice and may need to allocate time to handle inquiries or follow up. Important details are missing from the text provided—how those terms are defined, how notices must be delivered, and what fines or enforcement processes apply—so the precise costs, timelines, and enforcement outcomes are uncertain.