This bill amends existing state budget law (RCW 43.88.030 and RCW 43.88.055) to change procedural requirements, required contents of the governor’s biennial operating and capital budget documents, and several budget definitions used to constrain the governor’s proposed maintenance level. It makes statutory changes to how agencies must submit budget requests, what the governor must include in budget documents and appendices, and how capital projects and certain fund definitions are handled. Notable procedural and content changes include: the director of financial management must issue agency submission instructions at least three months before documents are due; the governor’s budget must include a budget message, performance indicators, explanations of major changes, and required schedules and exhibits; budget proposals must be based on forecasts from the economic and revenue forecast council and caseload forecast council or OFM estimates when those councils do not provide forecasts; all adjustments to approved estimated revenues and caseloads must be set forth in the budget document; the operating budget must reflect statewide priorities and identify activities not addressing those priorities; beginning in the 2021–2023 biennium the governor’s operating budget must leave a positive ending fund balance in the general fund and related funds and the projected maintenance level must not exceed available fiscal resources for the next ensuing biennium, subject to specified exceptions including certain reductions to avoid across‑the‑board allotment reductions and appropriations from the budget stabilization account. The bill also specifies detailed items required in budget and capital documents (revenue and expenditure tables, debt service, agency operating revenues/expenditures, postretirement adjustments for certain retirement systems, identification of proposed direct expenditures to implement the Puget Sound water quality plan, and other elements). On capital budgeting, the bill requires a separate capital budget with a long‑range facilities plan, multi‑biennium capital program and plan, a backlog reduction strategy, detailed project statements including component cost breakdowns for projects over $5 million, and required identification of operation and maintenance costs for land acquisitions for recreation or wildlife habitat for at least the two biennia following the next biennium. Agencies seeking capital funding in the 2025–2027 or 2027–2029 biennia must explain any “substantially increased” project cost (defined as more than 15% above the prior request as adjusted by C‑100 inflation factors) and must provide the construction cost estimate for the original design if the increase is due to a design change. The governor must include standard terms for capital projects and a uniform definition of “normal maintenance.” The bill defines “related funds” to include four named accounts and sets definitions for “available fiscal resources” and “projected maintenance level,” while deferring the final statutory definition of “capital project” to the work of a joint legislative/OFM committee. The extracted text is incomplete in places: the amendment text to RCW 43.88.055 is cited but not fully shown, parts of the capital omnibus list and the beginning of some provisions are missing, the source or meaning of the referenced “C‑100 inflation factors” is not explained, and the final statutory definition of “capital project” is deferred to a committee and not provided here.

If enacted, state budgeting would be pushed toward tighter fiscal discipline and much more detailed reporting. The director of financial management must give agencies their budget instructions earlier, the governor’s operating budget must show a positive ending balance in the general fund and certain related accounts beginning in 2021–23, and the projected “maintenance level” for the next biennium generally cannot exceed available fiscal resources as defined in the bill. Agencies must base proposals on official revenue and caseload forecasts (or OFM estimates where forecasts are not available) and must clearly disclose any adjustments. Capital requests will need more detailed cost breakdowns and, for projects in the 2025–27 and 2027–29 requests, agencies must explain any cost increases over 15 percent from prior legislative requests and provide original design cost estimates if changes in design caused the increases. The governor must also include standard terms for capital projects and a uniform definition of “normal maintenance,” and no format changes to budget documents can be made without legislative agreement. The people and offices most affected are the governor and OFM (who must prepare and certify these documents and constraints), every state agency that files biennial operating or capital requests (which will face more paperwork, stricter limits on how much “baseline” spending can grow, and closer scrutiny of cost increases), and legislative budget committees that will enforce or approve presentation changes. Agencies that plan capital projects may need more staff time and cost analysis up front, and they will have less flexibility to justify large cost increases without documentation. Some details needed to fully understand implementation are missing from the provided text: the amended language to RCW 43.88.055, the final legal definition of “capital project,” and how “C-100 inflation factors” are applied are not included, so certain administrative choices and impacts remain uncertain.