The bill amends RCW 10.101.050, 10.101.060, and 10.101.070 and adds new sections to chapter 10.101 RCW and chapter 2.56 RCW to change how trial-level public defense is funded and overseen. Beginning in fiscal year 2026 the state shares funding responsibility with counties and cities: the state is responsible for 50 percent of public defense costs calculated from a five-year average of eligible counties’ actual expenditures looking back from fiscal year 2024, and the state covers costs that exceed that five-year average. The Washington state office of public defense must disburse appropriated funds to eligible counties and eligible cities that apply and meet application and reporting requirements; counties receiving state distributions must use any county funds supplanted by state distributions only for specified activities (for example, pretrial diversion, alternatives to incarceration, reentry services, certain administrative costs, behavioral health services, and housing development consistent with RCW 82.14.540) and must annually report expenditures, case statistics, per-attorney caseloads, and attorney billable hours. The bill changes allocation and administrative procedures for distribution of the designated “county moneys.” Fifty percent of that amount is to be distributed pro rata to eligible counties based on the annual number of criminal cases filed in county superior court as a percentage of the total for eligible counties; beginning in fiscal year 2027 and thereafter distributions are to be pro rata based on the annual number of cases filed in courts under a county’s jurisdiction for which a public defender was assigned. The office of public defense must monitor trial-level public defense services, create data collection criteria and reporting forms, examine and recommend ways to reduce caseloads and backlogs, require counties to report the number of accused who are unrepresented due to a shortage of qualified lawyers, make retention recommendations for high-need counties, and report findings to the legislature by December 1, 2026. The office of the administrator for the courts must collect and report countyand city-level totals of cases assigned a public defender consistent with chapter 2.68 RCW. The bill also authorizes an operational change for very low-density counties: any county with fewer than 50 persons per square mile may request the office of public defense assume all or part of public defense service delivery for the county; if the office has capacity it must respond within 180 days, may retain the county’s pro rata funds to provide services, may use state employees or contract counsel, may set service delivery standards consistent with WSBA-endorsed standards, and the county must contribute funds equal to its public defense responsibility. Important details are missing from the provided text: the statutory criteria that define which counties and cities are “eligible,” the complete distribution formula language that was cut off in one section, the phrase “this amount” is not defined in the excerpt, and the full text and exact section numbers of the new provisions added to chapter 10.101 and chapter 2.56 RCW are not included.

If enacted, the state will pick up a much larger share of local public defense costs starting in fiscal 2026: it will pay half of an established five‑year county spending average and cover costs above that average, with the Office of Public Defense distributing those state "county moneys" to counties and eligible cities on a pro rata basis (initially tied to superior court criminal filings and, beginning in fiscal 2027, to the number of cases where a public defender was assigned). That will likely reduce direct county budget pressure for defense services and free up replaced local dollars, but those replaced local funds may only be spent on specified things like pretrial diversion, reentry, behavioral health, affordable housing development, and certain administrative costs; cities must meet training and reporting rules to receive funds. Counties, cities, public defender agencies, and contractors will face new reporting, training, and oversight duties: counties must appoint a lawyer as a public defense coordinator, collect and report detailed case and attorney hour data, and document compliance with Washington State Bar Association standards each year, while contractors must report private‑practice billing to cities. Low‑density counties can ask the state office to assume some or all defense delivery, shifting operational responsibility and the county’s pro rata funding to the state, but key details remain unclear—most notably which counties and cities qualify as “eligible” and the exact distribution mechanics and amounts—so the precise fiscal impact and who benefits most cannot be determined from the provided text.