SSB 6047
In CommitteeSenate
State capital projects
Concerning statutory guidelines for the administration of state capital projects.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill overhauls Washington’s state capital project management by requiring more detailed planning, cost estimates, and oversight for major construction projects, while streamlining rules for smaller projects. It introduces mandatory predesign reviews for large projects, tightens rules on unused funding, and gives Washington State University a new role in testing best practices for small and diverse-owned businesses.
- Requires detailed capital budget submissions—including long-range facility plans, full-time equivalent staff assigned to capital projects, and breakdowns of project costs—for all agencies and higher education institutions.
- Mandates a predesign review process for major capital projects costing over $10 million, including evaluation of alternatives, life-cycle costs, and value engineering—unless the Office of Financial Management waives the requirement for low-complexity projects.
- Establishes new rules for minor works projects ($25,000–$2 million, or $4 million for higher education), including a 4% administrative fee cap, prioritization criteria (e.g., health and safety), and restrictions on reappropriating unspent funds.
- Requires agencies to submit progress reports on major capital projects at least twice a year, including comparisons of estimated vs. actual costs and timelines.
- Prohibits reappropriation of grant or community project funds if contracts aren’t executed within 4 years or funds aren’t spent within 6 years of original appropriation.
- Authorizes Washington State University to conduct design-build demonstration projects under $2 million to develop best practices for small and diverse-owned business participation, with biennial reports to the legislature.
Who is affected
- State agencies — State agencies must follow new rules for submitting capital budget requests, including more detailed project information, predesign reviews for large projects, and stricter rules on reappropriating unused funds.
- Institutions of higher education — Higher education institutions (e.g., UW, WSU, community and technical colleges) must follow new capital project reporting and prioritization rules, and WSU is authorized to run special demonstration projects to test best practices for small and diverse-owned businesses.
- Small and diverse-owned businesses — Small, minority-, women-, and veteran-owned businesses may gain more opportunities to participate in state capital projects through WSU-led demonstration projects and improved access to minor works projects.
- Washington residents — The public benefits from more transparent, accountable, and timely spending on state buildings, roads, and other infrastructure, and from better planning for maintenance backlogs and long-term facility needs.
- State legislature — The legislature gains more oversight tools and standardized data to evaluate and approve capital projects, including requirements for predesign reviews, cost estimates, and regular progress reporting.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Mandated prioritization of minor works projects based on health and safety, facility usage, and avoidance of future repair costs improves public safety outcomes—especially for vulnerable populations using state facilities like schools, prisons, and social service buildings.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(d) & Sec. 4(4)Prohibition on reappropriating unused grant or community project funds after 4–6 years reduces waste and ensures public funds support timely, active projects—benefiting communities waiting for infrastructure improvements and social services.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 5 & Sec. 3(1)(j)Mandatory predesign reviews for major capital projects over $10M (with waivers only for low-complexity projects) improve long-term facility safety, functionality, and cost efficiency—reducing risk of structural failures and costly post-construction repairs.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 7 & Sec. 43.88.110(5)Requirement for long-range facility plans and standardized definitions (e.g., ‘normal maintenance’) helps prevent deferred maintenance backlogs, improving safety and reliability of state infrastructure across Washington.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(b) & Sec. 3(1)(l)Expanded reimbursement (up to 100%) for early learning facilities in affordable housing developments increases access to quality early education for low-income families—particularly benefiting children in underserved communities.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 10 & Sec. 43.31.574
Potential Concerns (1)
Local governments and agencies may face increased administrative burden due to new documentation and reporting requirements for minor works projects, including detailed project status reports and adherence to strict reappropriation timelines.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 4(3)
Who Is Most Affected
State agencies face increased administrative costs and stricter oversight, but benefit from clearer planning frameworks and reduced risk of project overruns or funding lapses.
Higher education institutions gain WSU-led demonstration projects to improve small/diverse business participation, but must comply with more rigorous capital budgeting and reporting standards.
Small and diverse-owned businesses benefit from WSU-led demonstration projects and priority access to minor works projects, though impact depends on agency outreach and WSU’s reporting quality.
Residents benefit from improved infrastructure safety, reduced project waste, and better long-term planning—especially in underserved communities served by state facilities.
The legislature gains stronger oversight tools and standardized data, but must invest in reviewing more detailed submissions and monitoring compliance.