This bill directs the Washington State Office of Public Defense to disburse appropriated state funds to counties and cities to improve the quality of public defense. It creates a new section in chapter 10.101 RCW and amends RCW 10.101.050 and 10.101.060 to require jurisdictions that seek these funds to impose annual, office-approved training for public defense attorneys, report prior-year expenditures and case statistics (including per-attorney caseloads) and provide copies of current public defense contracts, and—where practicable—document compliance with Washington Supreme Court standards for indigent defense. Appointed attorneys must record and report time and activity per case to a public defense administrator, and the Washington State Bar Association must work with the Office to publish time-tracking guidelines. The provision says nothing in it requires disclosures that would violate the rules of professional conduct. The bill establishes a phased state funding schedule for trial-level public defense costs: a state share of at least 10% in FY 2027, 15% in FY 2028, 20% in FY 2029, 25% in FY 2030, and at least 30% in FY 2031 and thereafter. The Office must determine the cost of public defense annually using an average of actual expenditures reported by counties and cities for the previous two years and, subject to available funds, disburse designated funds on a pro rata basis per the statute. The Office must monitor eligibility for trial-level criminal public defense funding; jurisdictions found noncompliant are notified and given 90 days (or another mutually agreed period) to substantially correct deficiencies or lose eligibility, with appeals to the Office’s advisory committee to be filed within 30 days and that committee’s decision final. The Office is directed to prioritize distributions to counties with the largest trial-level criminal public defense backlogs and the most public defender vacancies until pro rata distributions are met. This is a procedural and fiscal change to existing law that creates a new statutory section and revises existing RCW provisions; it imposes reporting, training, timekeeping, monitoring, and eligibility conditions tied to state funding. The extracted text does not include the actual pro rata formula referenced, the text of the Washington Supreme Court standards for indigent defense, a numbered citation for the new section, or detailed reporting formats and precise calculation methods beyond using a two-year average.

If enacted, the state will begin paying an increasing share of local public defense costs (starting at 10% of cost in FY2027 and rising to at least 30% by FY2031) but those payments will be conditional on counties and cities meeting new reporting, training, and compliance requirements. Local governments that follow the rules and submit last-year expenditure and caseload data will receive pro rata disbursements based on the Office of Public Defense’s annual cost calculation (an average of the prior two years’ reported spending), and the Office will prioritize funds to jurisdictions with the largest criminal defense backlogs and most vacancies until pro rata allocations are reached. Counties, cities, public defense administrators, and trial-level defense providers will face new ongoing duties: require attorneys to attend annual Office-approved training, collect and submit prior-year spending and per-attorney caseload statistics, provide current defense contracts, and ensure appointed attorneys record and report time and activity per case (with the WSBA to publish time-tracking guidance). Those actions will likely increase administrative work and may raise local costs to meet standards; failure to document compliance can lead to loss of eligibility after a 90-day cure period with a limited appeal to the Office’s advisory committee. Important implementation details are missing here, including the exact pro rata formula, the specific court standards that must be documented, and the precise reporting formats or documentation that will satisfy compliance.