SGA 9215
In CommitteeSenate
KATHERINE D. CHAPMAN-SEE
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 formally appoints Katherine D. Chapman-See as Director of the Office of Financial Management, effective January 15, 2025. Her role is to lead the state’s central budget and fiscal planning office, and she will serve at the governor’s discretion.
- Appoints Katherine D. Chapman-See as Director of the Office of Financial Management (OFM).
- Her term is set to end at the governor's pleasure, meaning she serves at the governor's discretion and can be removed or replaced at any time.
- This is an agency head position, placing her in charge of the state's primary fiscal and budget planning agency.
Who is affected
- Director of the Office of Financial Management — The individual appointed as Director of the Office of Financial Management will serve at the governor's discretion, meaning they can be removed or replaced by the governor at any time.
Who Is Most Affected
As the individual appointed to this role, Ms. Chapman-See gains formal authority over the state’s budget and fiscal planning process, including influence over revenue estimates, economic forecasts, and agency funding recommendations. However, her position is politically vulnerable, as she serves at the governor’s pleasure and can be removed at any time—limiting her long-term autonomy or policy influence unless she retains the governor’s confidence.
The Office of Financial Management plays a central role in shaping the state budget, economic assumptions, and fiscal policy. Changes in leadership can shift the agency’s priorities—e.g., emphasis on tax reform, spending restraint, or investment in social services—potentially affecting the scale, timing, or design of programs that impact everyday Washingtonians. However, this bill itself does not alter OFM’s statutory authority or operations, so impacts are indirect and contingent on future leadership decisions.
The governor gains direct control over the head of the state’s fiscal planning office, reinforcing executive authority over budget formulation and fiscal policy. This aligns with standard executive appointment practices in Washington State and does not inherently shift power away from elected accountability. However, it also means fiscal policy direction is more closely tied to the governor’s personal priorities and political agenda.
This appointment does not directly change tax policy, service delivery, or funding formulas. Since the bill is purely a personnel designation with no fiscal or regulatory changes, everyday residents are unlikely to experience any measurable impact—positive or negative—beyond the usual lag between leadership changes and policy implementation (if any occur).
As a state agency head position, this appointment does not create new regulatory burdens or exemptions for businesses. However, future OFM leadership could influence fiscal climate through budget recommendations or economic forecasts—e.g., advocating for corporate tax incentives or infrastructure investment. This bill itself does not trigger such changes.