Skip to main content

SHB 1198

In Committee

House

Operating budget

Making 2025-2027 fiscal biennium operating appropriations and 2023-2025 fiscal biennium second supplemental operating appropriations.

This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: March 26, 2025
Last Action: January 12, 2026
Status: H Rules X
Companion Bill:

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

SHB 1198 establishes Washington’s $19.1 billion biennial operating budget for 2026–2027, funding core government operations, K–12 and higher education, human services, and State v. Blake compliance. It includes targeted investments in student support, staff capacity, and accountability measures, while enforcing strict rules on how funds may be used.

  • Adopts a $19.1 billion biennial operating budget for fiscal years 2026 and 2027 (July 1, 2025–June 30, 2027).
  • Allocates over $200 million for State v. Blake implementation—including legal services, conviction vacatur, and refund of legal financial obligations—across courts, public defense, civil legal aid, DSHS, and the Health Care Authority.
  • Provides $22.7 billion for K–12 public schools and $5.9 billion for community and technical colleges, plus targeted funding for teacher residencies, dual language programs, and student mental health and basic needs support.
  • Sets caseload limits (e.g., 1:18 for child welfare workers) and authorizes 2.4% and 2.0% salary increases for state employees in FY26 and FY27, respectively.
  • Imposes strict fund-use conditions: many line items are 'provided solely' for a specific purpose, with unspent balances lapsing; transfers between accounts require approval.

Who is affected

  • State employees and social services staffState employees across multiple branches receive salary increases (2.4% and 2.0% in FY26 and FY27), and caseload limits are set for child welfare workers (1:18 ratio).
  • People impacted by prior drug possession convictionsIndividuals previously convicted under Washington’s old drug possession law (RCW 69.50.4012) receive refunds of legal financial obligations, conviction vacatur, and access to legal and support services due to State v. Blake.
  • Public university and community college studentsStudents at public higher education institutions gain access to expanded mental health services, tutoring, basic needs support, teacher residency programs, and affordability initiatives.
  • Tribal communities and Indigenous studentsTribal nations and Indigenous students receive targeted support for college access, retention, and culturally responsive programming.
  • State agencies and program managersState agencies must comply with new reporting requirements (e.g., quarterly IT dashboards, annual performance reports) and adhere to strict fund-use limitations.
Effective: 2025-07-01Fiscal impact: Total biennial budget appropriation exceeds $19.1 billion ($11.8B in Section 1 + $1.2B+ in Section 2), including over $200 million for State v. Blake implementation and $22.7 billion for K–12 general apportionment.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 10:39 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)
  • Over $200 million allocated for vacating prior drug convictions and refunding legal financial obligations directly benefits individuals—especially low-income and formerly incarcerated people—who face lifelong barriers to employment, housing, and public benefits due to past convictions.

    Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Section 2 (State v. Blake Implementation)
  • Targeted investments in mental health, basic needs, teacher residencies, and dual language programs directly support students from low-income families, English learners, and historically underserved groups, improving equity in educational outcomes.

    EducationPeopleRef: Section 2 (K–12 Student Support Funding)
  • $5.9 billion for community and technical colleges—including tutoring, mental health, and affordability initiatives—lowers barriers to postsecondary completion for working-age adults and first-generation students.

    EducationPeopleRef: Section 2 (Higher Education Funding)
  • 2.4% and 2.0% salary increases for state employees in FY26 and FY27 provide modest cost-of-living adjustments, supporting middle- and working-class public sector workers who provide essential services (e.g., education, corrections, social services).

    Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Section 2 (State Employee Salary Increases)
  • Setting a 1:18 caseload ratio for child welfare workers improves capacity to conduct timely investigations and provide trauma-informed support, enhancing child safety and family stability.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Section 2 (Caseload Limits for Child Welfare Workers)
Potential Concerns (5)
  • The $19.1 billion biennial budget expands state spending, increasing the state’s fiscal footprint; while this supports public services, it also contributes to long-term structural spending growth that may pressure future budgets and require higher taxes or reduced services elsewhere.

    FinancialRef: Section 1 (Budget Authority) & Section 2 (Appropriations)
  • Strict fund-use limitations (e.g., ‘provided solely’ for specific purposes, lapsing balances) reduce local agency flexibility to respond to emergent community needs, potentially hindering efficient service delivery during crises or shifts in demand.

    Local GovernmentRef: Section 2 (Fund Use Restrictions)
  • Requiring legislative approval for inter-account transfers may delay emergency or real-time resource reallocation, slowing response to unexpected events (e.g., natural disasters, public health crises).

    Local GovernmentRef: Section 2 (Transfer Restrictions)
  • Mandated quarterly IT dashboards and annual performance reports impose administrative burdens on state and local agencies, diverting staff time and resources from direct service delivery.

    Local GovernmentRef: Section 2 (Reporting Requirements)
  • While caseload limits for child welfare workers improve service quality, they may strain agency capacity if staffing does not keep pace, potentially increasing turnover and delays in case resolution.

    Public SafetyRef: Section 2 (Caseload Limits)

Who Is Most Affected

State employees and social services staffPositive Impact

State employees, especially those in social services, education, and corrections, benefit from salary increases and improved caseload ratios, leading to better job retention, reduced burnout, and higher service quality.

People impacted by prior drug possession convictionsPositive Impact

Individuals with prior drug convictions—disproportionately low-income and people of color—gain tangible relief: convictions vacated, LFOs refunded, and access to legal support, reducing lifelong collateral consequences.

Public university and community college studentsPositive Impact

Community college and university students, especially those from low-income or first-generation backgrounds, benefit from expanded mental health services, tutoring, and affordability programs that improve retention and graduation.

Tribal communities and Indigenous studentsPositive Impact

Tribal nations and Indigenous students receive culturally responsive college support, strengthening educational equity and tribal sovereignty in higher education delivery.

State agencies and program managersMixed Impact

State agencies face increased administrative and compliance burdens (e.g., reporting, fund-use restrictions), which may reduce operational agility but improve transparency and accountability.