This bill amends existing school safety law (RCW 28A.320.125), adds a new section to chapter 28A.320 RCW, and amends the public records exemption statute (RCW 42.56.420). It requires that school comprehensive safe school plans include specified safety policies and procedures, monthly documented drills teaching shelter‑in‑place, lockdown, and evacuation (including site‑specific earthquake and lahar/tsunami pedestrian evacuations), incident command system certification for building principals, coordination with local responders, and, subject to available appropriations, creation and maintenance of digital school maps that meet new interoperability and content requirements. The bill also creates a duty for first responder agencies that notify a school of an incident to notify other nearby schools that appear reasonably threatened and limits responder liability except for willful disregard. The superintendent of public instruction may adopt implementing rules. The bill establishes detailed technical and content requirements for "school mapping data" (though no single statutory definition is provided in the extracted text). Required mapping elements include orientation to true north, X/Y grid coordinates, Z‑axis elevation values for three‑dimensional referencing, accurate floor plans verified by an on‑site walkthrough and overlaid on contemporaneous aerial imagery, and site‑specific labels for interior spaces, exterior access/egress, elevation features, exterior structures, and safety/security/critical infrastructure components. It also requires software controls to prevent independent modification of maps unless corresponding updates are propagated to underlying mapping data across all software platforms used by every local and state public safety agency that provides emergency services to the mapped school, and it requires that all school mapping data be collected, accessed, and stored within the United States. As a legal change, the bill creates new procedural requirements for school safety planning and drills, creates new technical requirements for school maps, and expands public records exemptions by adding school mapping data and other security‑related information to the categories exempt from disclosure in RCW 42.56.420. It also encourages grant applications and multiagency exercises and applies these requirements to school districts, charter schools, state‑tribal compact schools, and private schools to the same extent as public school districts. The extracted text is incomplete in places: section 3 is truncated, the full amended language for RCW 42.56.420 and any effective dates, enforcement mechanisms, or penalties (if any) are not included, and there is no standalone statutory definition of "school mapping data" in the material provided.

If enacted, schools and school districts would need to create and keep detailed, three-dimensional, on-site-verified maps showing rooms, exits, utility and safety equipment, elevations, evacuation and reunification sites, and other fixed features, and make those maps available to local and state first responders; the maps would be exempt from public disclosure and must be collected and handled within the United States. The bill also reinforces monthly safety drills and annual plan reviews (when funds are available), requires principals to be incident-command certified, extends requirements to charter, state-tribal, and private schools, and requires first responders who notify a school about a threat to also notify other nearby schools when reasonably necessary. In practice, school districts, schools, educational service districts, OSPI, emergency management agencies, and the vendors they use will likely face new costs and staff time for physical walk-throughs, producing accurate floor plans and overlays, ongoing coordination with multiple response agencies, and maintaining controls that prevent independent map changes unless updates propagate to all public safety platforms; private cloud providers with CJIS agreements are explicitly implicated by the exemptions. Important implementation details are missing from the available text—including portions of the mapping section, how much funding will be provided, exact timelines, and enforcement—so the full scale of costs and who must pay them remains uncertain.