This bill creates a new Washington jail council placed in the governor’s office (new chapter in Title 43 RCW) and amends RCW 70.48.510 to change unexpected fatality review procedures. The council is an oversight body with a full‑time director appointed by the governor from nominees submitted by the council, a requirement to meet at least quarterly, and duties to collect, analyze, and report jail information; administer an annual jail survey; monitor jails for compliance with law and policy; investigate specific and systemic issues; provide technical assistance; maintain a public website and toll‑free line; and submit an annual report to the governor and legislature. The council is declared a “health oversight agency” so HIPAA and state health confidentiality rules do not bar relevant information sharing with the council when done under the bill’s provisions. The bill creates investigatory and access powers and associated procedures: the director and designees have reasonable access to jail areas, authority to privately survey or interview incarcerated people and staff, and the right to inspect and copy jail records. Time limits are specified for producing records (20 business days generally; five days for records relating to a death, threats of bodily harm, or denial of necessary medical treatment unless extended by the council), and initial/background security checks for access must meet short deadlines (initial within 48 hours; subsequent checks not delay more than two hours). The council may use audio and limited visual recording (but not to reveal camera locations/angles). The bill also states filing a complaint with the council is not required to exhaust remedies under the federal Prison Litigation Reform Act, and investigations must not interfere with ongoing criminal investigations. The bill contains confidentiality, disclosure, and immunity rules: investigations, complaints, and identities of complainants, informants, or witnesses are confidential and exempt from public disclosure; council personnel cannot be compelled to testify or produce work product; internal memoranda and case files are not subject to discovery or admissible as evidence; the council may report findings (with identities protected) to licensing, disciplinary, law enforcement, or prosecuting agencies but must contact affected jail employees and their bargaining representatives before reporting matters that could warrant sanctions; and council employees and good‑faith information providers are granted civil immunity and anti‑retaliation protections. The amendment to RCW 70.48.510 requires city or county correctional authorities to conduct unexpected fatality reviews (including root cause analysis and corrective action plans), include the council director or designee on the review team, ensure team members had no prior involvement, issue a report within 120 days (subject to limited extension), and post reports on a Department of Health website; reviews are generally not admissible in civil or administrative proceedings with limited exceptions for licensing or discipline. Some parts of the bill text are missing from the provided extracts (including the completion of the provision on how information provided to the council is governed and the full composition and certain procedural details referenced elsewhere), so those specifics are not available here.

If enacted, Washington would get a state-level jail oversight body placed in the governor’s office (only if the legislature funds it) that can regularly survey and inspect city and county jails, privately interview incarcerated people and staff, make audio and limited visual recordings, demand records on tight timelines (20 business days normally, five days for deaths or serious harm), and join local unexpected fatality review teams with results posted publicly by the Department of Health. The council would publish redacted reports, refer matters to licensing, disciplinary, or law enforcement agencies, and require written responses from jail administrators within a month, so jails should expect quicker external scrutiny and more formal review of deaths and incidents. The groups most affected are local jail administrators and governing units, who will face new administrative work, faster document-production deadlines, potential costs to support inspections and compliance, and a greater chance that identified problems lead to licensing, disciplinary, or criminal referrals; jail staff and health providers will be subject to interviews and information sharing under a declared health‑oversight privilege, while council staff gain legal protections and confidentiality rules that limit compelled disclosure of their work. Important implementation details remain unclear from the available text—particularly the rest of the confidentiality/disclosure rules and the full content and procedures for the required jail survey—so the exact scope, timing, and funding needs are uncertain.