Washington AI task force outlines transparency, ethics priorities; state issues generative-AI guidance

The Technology, Economic Development and Veterans Committee on Jan. 22 heard an overview of the Washington State Artificial Intelligence Task Force—s preliminary report and related state guidance on generative AI developed under Gov. Jay Inslee—s executive order.

The Attorney General—s Office, which staffs the task force, told the committee the group has issued a preliminary report and will issue further, issue-specific recommendations before its interim report due Dec. 1, 2025, and its final report due July 1, 2026. "Artificial intelligence, broadly speaking, refers to computer systems that are designed to perform tasks associated with human intelligence," said Ellen M. Austin Hall, Senior Policy and External Affairs Manager, Attorney General's Office.

The task force—s work so far has focused on organizing into subcommittees, broad public outreach and beginning policy work. "Transparent AI systems, which are understandable and accessible to users, developers, and regulators are a cornerstone of trustworthy AI," said Yuki Ishizuka, Senior Policy Analyst, Attorney General's Office, summarizing a top task-force priority: defining elements of ethical and trustworthy AI with a particular focus on transparency.

Speakers told the committee the task force unanimously adopted an initial recommendation in December to amend state law to prohibit creation and distribution of AI-generated sexual images of minors regardless of identifiability; senators have introduced legislation that reflects that recommendation. The task force, created by Engrossed Second Substitute Bill 5838, comprises 19 members including four legislators and representatives from industry, labor, tribes and community groups; the AGO administers and staffs it.

Representatives from Washington Technology Solutions (WATEC) described four executive-order deliverables they led: interim generative-AI guidelines, procurement guidelines, deployment/risk-assessment guidance and an equity/accountability framework. "Most importantly, these guidelines don't, they aren't the they don't just tell you what not to do," said Katie Ruckel, the state's chief privacy officer, describing WATEC—s intent to both manage risk and identify early use cases such as language translation, plain-language drafting and accelerating software development.

WATEC—s chief technology officer, Nick Stowe, told the committee the state plans a managed "sandbox" environment so agencies can test generative-AI use cases with controls in place and recommended agencies continuously monitor models for drift and scope creep. Stowe said the WATEC guidance aligns with the National Institute of Standards and Technology AI Risk Management Framework and the White House blueprint for trustworthy AI principles.

Committee members asked about topics the task force and WATEC are studying, including government use of AI, tribal outreach, workforce impacts and environmental costs. "Environmental impact and sustainability ... is identified as a risk to be considered," Ruckel said in response to a question about energy use, adding the task force and WATEC have raised the issue with their community of practice.

Both panels told the committee they welcome collaboration with legislators. The Attorney General—s Office and WATEC said they will continue subcommittee-specific outreach and will release recommendations across the year rather than waiting for the formal interim report.

Why it matters: state officials said they intend to balance innovation and risk mitigation as Washington agencies consider generative-AI tools that may affect health, safety, fundamental rights, procurement and state-held data. The task force and WATEC guidance are intended to inform agency choices about procurement, deployment and ongoing oversight of AI systems.

What the committee did: the meeting was a work session and briefing; no formal legislative action or vote on AI policy occurred.