This bill amends RCW 42.30.140 and adds a new section to chapter 41.59 RCW. It conditions the existing Open Public Meetings Act exemption for collective bargaining sessions on the new transparency requirements and creates new procedural duties for school districts when conducting collective bargaining contract negotiations. Under the new section school districts must hold negotiations “open to public observation” in person and by video streaming or playback, give public notice of negotiations under chapter 42.30 RCW, post and maintain all notes, documentation, and collective bargaining proposals on the district’s official website within two business days of their transmission between negotiating parties, and post final collective bargaining agreements on the district’s website for the life of the agreement. The provision explicitly excludes post‑execution enforcement meetings, including individual employee grievance proceedings, from the “open to public observation” requirement and does not require districts to allow public comment during negotiations. The bill makes any person who participated in a collective bargaining negotiation in violation of the new section subject to the Open Public Meetings Act; however, the text does not specify enforcement mechanisms, penalties, or remedies beyond that statement. The exact new section number in chapter 41.59 RCW is not provided here, and key terms such as “notes,” “documentation,” and “life of the agreement” are not defined in the provided text. The bill was first read on 02/02/26 as House Bill 2712.

If enacted, school districts would have to let the public watch collective bargaining sessions in person and by video stream or playback, give public notice of those meetings under the state open meetings law, and post all bargaining notes, proposals, and documentation on the district website within two business days of when they are sent between negotiators. Districts must also keep final signed agreements posted for the life of the agreement. That shifts day-to-day responsibilities onto districts and bargaining parties: they will need to schedule public observation, run or host video, and timely publish materials, which likely raises staff time, technology, and record‑maintenance costs and creates a higher risk that bargaining actions could be found to violate the open meetings law. The people most affected are school district administrators and employee organizations negotiating contracts, who will have less private space to negotiate and may need to change how and when they exchange proposals. The bill text does not define key terms like “notes,” “documentation,” or “life of the agreement,” nor does it specify enforcement procedures or penalties beyond saying a participant who violates the rule is in violation of the open meetings law, so there is uncertainty about how exactly posting requirements and enforcement would work in practice.