Skip to main content

HB 2519

In Committee

House

Utilities/education entities

Requiring utilities to provide discounted rates to entities that provide a public education for elementary and secondary students.

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: January 14, 2026
Last Action: January 15, 2026
Status: H Env & Energy

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 & CommunitiesBalancedCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill requires utilities and public utility districts across Washington to provide escalating discounts on electricity, gas, and water/sewer bills to public K–12 education providers—including school districts, charter schools, and state-tribal compact schools—starting at 10% in 2027 and rising to 60% by 2032. Utilities must recover lost revenue by adjusting rates for other customers, with oversight from regulators.

  • Requires electric, gas, and water/sewer utilities (including investor-owned, consumer-owned, and municipal utilities) to provide escalating discounts to public K–12 education providers—starting at 10% in 2027, increasing by 10 percentage points each year until reaching 60% in 2032 and beyond.
  • Applies to school districts, charter schools (under chapter 28A.710 RCW), and state-tribal education compact schools (under chapter 28A.715 RCW).
  • Mandates that utilities and public utility districts include lost revenue from discounts in their cost-of-service and recover it through rate changes for other customers, subject to approval by the Utilities and Transportation Commission or local governing boards.
  • Requires the Utilities and Transportation Commission to approve or modify proposed discount programs in rate cases, and gives water-sewer districts and cities/towns authority to implement similar discounts for stormwater/sewer services.
  • Amends existing laws governing water-sewer districts (chapter 57.08 RCW) and cities/towns (chapter 35.92.020) to explicitly include authority to provide discounted rates to education providers for stormwater and sewer services.
  • Clarifies that the bill does not reduce the state’s minimum funding per student for operating costs and supplies (per RCW 28A.150.260).

Who is affected

  • Public K–12 education providersSchool districts, charter schools, and state-tribal education compact schools will receive progressively increasing discounts on utility bills for electricity, gas, and water/sewer services, starting at 10% in 2027 and reaching 60% by 2032 and beyond.
  • Utility companiesUtility companies (electric, gas, and water/sewer providers) must offer discounted rates to education providers and recover lost revenue by adjusting rates for other customers.
  • Public utility districts and municipal utilitiesWater-sewer districts and cities/towns that operate utility systems must apply the same discounted rates to education providers as other utilities, and must include lost revenue in their cost-of-service calculations.
  • Other utility customersOther customers (residential, commercial, industrial) may see modest rate increases over time as utilities recover lost revenue from education discounts through cost-of-service rate adjustments.
Effective: March 31, 2026Fiscal impact: The bill requires utilities and public utility districts to recover lost revenue from discounted rates by spreading the cost across all other customers through rate adjustments. The Utilities and Transportation Commission and local governing boards must approve these rate changes in formal proceedings. No direct state general fund impact is anticipated.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 8:04 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Potential Benefits (3)
  • Public K–12 education providers—including school districts, charter schools, and state-tribal compact schools—will see steep, predictable utility cost reductions (10% → 60% over 6 years), freeing up operating funds for classroom instruction, teacher salaries, and student services. This directly supports the state’s constitutional mandate of “ample provision” for education.

    EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3, Sec. 5, Sec. 9(3)(b)
  • Reduced utility costs for schools may improve building safety and reliability—e.g., better heating in winter, reliable ventilation, and functional lab equipment—supporting safer learning environments, especially in older or underfunded districts.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2), Sec. 10
  • By reducing operational costs for schools—many of which serve as community hubs and emergency shelters—the bill helps stabilize public infrastructure that supports neighborhood resilience, especially in underserved communities.

    HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(d), Sec. 1(2)
Potential Concerns (3)
  • Other utility customers—including low- and middle-income households, small businesses, and rental properties—will bear the cost of the education discounts through higher rates, as utilities recover lost revenue via cost-of-service rate adjustments approved by regulators. This effectively transfers costs from a publicly funded sector to ratepayers, many of whom are already fiscally strained.

    FinancialIndustryRef: Sec. 3, Sec. 4, Sec. 6, Sec. 7
  • Water-sewer districts and municipalities must absorb administrative and regulatory burdens to implement and defend discount programs in rate cases, potentially diverting staff time and resources from other infrastructure priorities—especially burdensome for small or under-resourced local governments.

    Local GovernmentIndustryRef: Sec. 6, Sec. 7
  • The bill excludes private schools and religious schools from eligibility, creating inequity: similarly sized private institutions serving low-income students receive no utility cost relief, while publicly funded charters and tribal compacts do—despite all providing public education services under state oversight.

    EducationLean industryRef: Sec. 2 (definition of 'school district' excludes private schools)

Who Is Most Affected

Public K–12 education providersPositive Impact

Public K–12 education providers (school districts, charters, tribal compacts) will directly benefit from steep, escalating utility discounts—freeing up tens of millions of dollars annually in operating savings that can be redirected to teachers, maintenance, or student programs. This is a clear net positive.

Utility companies and public utility districtsMixed Impact

Utility companies and public utility districts must implement discounts and recover lost revenue through rate increases for other customers. While they face administrative costs and reputational risk, the bill ensures full cost recovery—so net financial impact is neutral to slightly negative. However, they gain regulatory certainty and avoid costly disputes over rate design.

Other utility customers (especially low- and middle-income households)Negative Impact

Residential and small commercial ratepayers—especially low- and middle-income households—will likely see modest but persistent rate increases over time as utilities recover education discounts. Since these customers cannot pass costs to tenants, they bear disproportionate burden relative to their ability to pay.

State and local governmentsMixed Impact

State and local governments benefit from reduced pressure on education budgets, potentially easing future tax levies or bond measures for schools. However, they also absorb indirect costs through increased regulatory oversight (e.g., UTC review of discount programs) and may face liability if rate increases trigger public backlash.

Private and religious schoolsNegative Impact

Private and religious schools are explicitly excluded, placing them at a competitive disadvantage relative to public and charter schools. This may increase financial strain on private institutions serving low-income families, potentially reducing their capacity to offer tuition assistance.

Sponsors

Representative Bergquist(Democrat)District 11Primary
Representative Simmons(Democrat)District 23Secondary
Representative Goodman(Democrat)District 45Secondary
Representative Pollet(Democrat)District 46Secondary
Representative Reed(Democrat)District 36Secondary