Senate committee hears bill to require underinsured‑motorist coverage for local government vehicle occupants

The Senate Local Government, Land Use & Tribal Affairs Committee took testimony on Senate Bill 5107, which would require local governments to provide underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage for government‑owned vehicles and persons operating or occupying them in the course of employment.

Committee staff Rohan Bhattacharjee summarized the bill and described it as requiring coverage “for vehicles owned by the local government, and operated or occupied by an officer, employee or agent in their course of employment,” with minimum limits of $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident. Staff said coverage could be provided through private carriers, self‑insurance, self‑funding or other legally authorized methods and that a fiscal note had been requested but not yet received.

Proponents told the committee the change would fix an uneven patchwork of protections for first responders. Senator Matt Behnke, who presented the bill in committee, said the measure responds to cases in which law enforcement officers have been injured by uninsured or underinsured drivers while on duty. Attorney Christina McKinnon described a case in which a Benton County deputy was pinned in his cruiser and later diagnosed with three rotator cuff tears after being struck by an uninsured driver; she said officers “don't even know that they don't have this coverage.”

Plaintiff attorneys said workers' compensation is sometimes inadequate to make officers whole. Michael Montgomery and Michael (last name Montgomery) testified that workers' compensation pays medical costs and partial wage replacement but does not provide damages for pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life or long‑term economic loss available in third‑party UIM recoveries.

Opponents raised cost, system and legal concerns. Tina Eck, general counsel for the Washington Schools Risk Management Pool, said the bill would create an unfunded mandate for school districts and require every school‑owned vehicle and bus to carry new coverage. She cited a 1997 board resolution by a predecessor risk pool that declined UIM coverage as “not in the best financial interest of the pool and its member districts.”

Association of Washington Cities representative Candice Bach, Washington Self Insurers Association executive director Chris Teft, and others warned the bill could conflict with the workers' compensation system’s “exclusive remedy” and create legal and fiscal entanglements between liability insurance and Title 51 benefits. Teft said mandating employer‑provided UIM risks putting employers in the same position as a negligent third party and could complicate who pays and when.

Senators asked about fiscal impacts and whether the state or local governments would pay. Staff and witnesses said the fiscal note was pending and that costs would depend on how many local governments already purchase comparable coverage, whether they self‑insure, and market rates for UIM. Witnesses estimated workers' compensation rates for public employers have risen significantly in recent years and that liability markets are also “hard,” but no specific aggregate statewide cost estimate was presented to the committee during the hearing.

The committee did not vote on the bill at the hearing.