WA Lawmakers Eye Firefighter Pension Surplus
Washington state lawmakers are reportedly considering a plan to tap into a $3 billion surplus in the LEOFF pension fund to address a budget deficit. The proposal has sparked immediate backlash from police and fire unions, with former sheriff Dave Reichert leading a lawsuit to protect the funds.
The Law Enforcement Officers' and Fire Fighters' (LEOFF) Plan 1 is a pension system for first responders hired before October 1, 1977. Due to strong investment returns and decades of contributions from the state (77%), local governments (11.5%), and employees (11.5%), the plan is now significantly overfunded. As of February 2026, the LEOFF 1 fund was approximately 160% funded, holding significantly more assets than needed to pay all projected benefits. The proposal, outlined in House Bill 2034, would dissolve and then immediately reinstate the LEOFF 1 plan. This maneuver is designed to legally free up the surplus funds. The bill would transfer enough money to the new plan to keep it 110% funded, leaving the rest—an estimated $2.5 billion to $3.3 billion—available for other state uses. Specifically, HB 2034 directs approximately $569 million of the surplus to the Climate Commitment Account. The remaining billions would be moved to the Pension Funding Stabilization Account, which the state uses to make employer contributions to other retirement systems like those for public employees and teachers. This legislative action comes as Washington faces a complex budget outlook. While earlier projections for the 2025-27 biennium showed a potential multi-billion dollar shortfall, the state's Economic and Revenue Forecast Council updated its projections in February 2026 to show an *increase* of $827 million for the current budget cycle and over $1.8 billion through 2029. Opponents argue the move is illegal and sets a dangerous precedent for all public pensions. The lawsuit led by former sheriff Dave Reichert contends the proposal violates the Washington State Constitution as well as federal laws that designate pension funds for the exclusive benefit of their members. This isn't the first attempt; lawmakers have tried to access these same funds for over two decades. Proponents of the bill, including House Appropriations Committee Chair Timm Ormsby, argue that while retirees have a constitutionally protected right to their earned benefits, they have no legal claim to surplus assets. They maintain that all pension obligations will still be met, as the new, "restated" plan would remain overfunded, and that using the excess funds is a responsible way to address other state financial commitments.
