Wash. Rev. Code » Title 42 · Chapter 42.17A
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.17A.755 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) The commission may initiate or respond to a complaint, request a technical correction, or otherwise resolve matters of compliance with this chapter, in accordance with this section. If a complaint is filed with or initiated by the commission, the commission must:
(a) Dismiss the complaint or otherwise resolve the matter in accordance with subsection (2) of this section, as appropriate under the circumstances after conducting a preliminary review;
(b) Initiate an investigation to determine whether a violation has occurred, conduct hearings, and issue and enforce an appropriate order, in accordance with chapter 34.05 RCW and subsection (3) of this section; or
(c) Refer the matter to the attorney general, in accordance with subsection (4) of this section.
(2)(a) For complaints of remediable violations or requests for technical corrections, the commission may, by rule, delegate authority to its executive director to resolve these matters in accordance with subsection (1)(a) of this section, provided the executive director consistently applies such authority.
(b) The commission shall, by rule, develop additional processes by which a respondent may agree by stipulation to any allegations and pay a penalty subject to a schedule of violations and penalties, unless waived by the commission as provided for in this section. Any stipulation must be referred to the commission for review. If approved or modified by the commission, agreed to by the parties, and the respondent complies with all requirements set forth in the stipulation, the matter is then considered resolved and no further action or review is allowed.
(3) If the commission initiates an investigation, an initial hearing must be held within ninety days of the complaint being filed. Following an investigation, in cases where it chooses to determine whether a violation has occurred, the commission shall hold a hearing pursuant to the administrative procedure act, chapter 34.05 RCW. Any order that the commission issues under this section shall be pursuant to such a hearing.
(a) The person against whom an order is directed under this section shall be designated as the respondent. The order may require the respondent to cease and desist from the activity that constitutes a violation and in addition, or alternatively, may impose one or more of the remedies provided in RCW 42.17A.750(1) (b) through (h), or other requirements as the commission determines appropriate to effectuate the purposes of this chapter.
(b) The commission may assess a penalty in an amount not to exceed ten thousand dollars per violation, unless the parties stipulate otherwise. Any order that the commission issues under this section that imposes a financial penalty must be made pursuant to a hearing, held in accordance with the administrative procedure act, chapter 34.05 RCW.
(c) The commission has the authority to waive a penalty for a first-time violation. A second violation of the same requirement by the same person, regardless if the person or individual committed the violation for a different political committee or incidental committee, shall result in a penalty. Successive violations of the same requirement shall result in successively increased penalties. The commission may suspend any portion of an assessed penalty contingent on future compliance with this chapter. The commission must create a schedule to enhance penalties based on repeat violations by the person.
(d) Any order issued by the commission is subject to judicial review under the administrative procedure act, chapter 34.05 RCW. If the commission's order is not satisfied and no petition for review is filed within thirty days, the commission may petition a court of competent jurisdiction of any county in which a petition for review could be filed under that jurisdiction, for an order of enforcement. Proceedings in connection with the commission's petition shall be in accordance with RCW 42.17A.760.
(4) In lieu of holding a hearing or issuing an order under this section, the commission may refer the matter to the attorney general consistent with this section, when the commission believes:
(a) Additional authority is needed to ensure full compliance with this chapter;
(b) An apparent violation potentially warrants a penalty greater than the commission's penalty authority; or
(c) The maximum penalty the commission is able to levy is not enough to address the severity of the violation.
(5) Prior to filing a citizen's action under RCW 42.17A.775, a person who has filed a complaint pursuant to this section must provide written notice to the attorney general if the commission does not, within 90 [ninety] days of the complaint being filed with the commission, take action pursuant to subsection (1) of this section. A person must simultaneously provide a copy of the written notice to the commission.
[ 2019 c 428 s 38; 2018 c 304 s 13; 2011 c 145 s 7; 2010 c 204 s 1002; 2006 c 315 s 3; 1989 c 175 s 91; 1985 c 367 s 12; 1982 c 147 s 16; 1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 112 s 12. Formerly RCW 42.17.395.]

Notes:

Effective date—Finding—Intent—2019 c 428: See notes following RCW 42.17A.160.
Finding—Intent—2018 c 304: See note following RCW 42.17A.235.
Findings—Intent—Effective date—2011 c 145: See notes following RCW 42.17A.005.
Intent—Severability—2006 c 315: See notes following RCW 42.17A.750.
Effective date—1989 c 175: See note following RCW 34.05.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2015–2026 · leading case: Utter v. Bldg. Indus. Ass'n, 341 P.3d 953 (Wash. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Utter v. Bldg. Indus. Ass'n, 341 P.3d 953 (Wash. 2015). · cites it 7× “RCW 42.17A.755 states: *422 (1) The commission may (a) determine whether an actual violation of this chapter has occurred; and (b) issue and enforce an appropriate order following such a determination.”
Freedom Found. v. Bethel Sch. Dist., At Al. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 10× “RCW 42.17A.755 and RCW 42.17A.775 A person who believes the FCPA has been violated may bring an action in the name of the State against the alleged violator in certain circumstances.”
Freedom Found., V. Serv. Employees Int'l Union 775 (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 8× “It argued that Freedom Foundation was barred from bringing a citizen’s action because the PDC had dismissed Freedom Foundation’s complaint within the requisite 90 days.”
Auto. United Trades Org., V Washington Pub. Discl (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “120(4) and RCW 42.17A.755. RCW 42.30.120(4) entitles a prevailing party in an action against a public agency under the OPMA to an award of costs, including reasonable attorney fees.”
West v. Washington State Dist. & Mun. Court Judges' Ass'n, 361 P.3d 210 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “RCW 42.17A.755. The statute also authorizes the attorney general and county prosecutors to bring civil actions in the name of the State for any appropriate civil remedy.”
State v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (Wash. 2026). “The PDC voted to refer the Sanders and Trask complaints to the attorney general for enforcement pursuant to former RCW 42.17A.755(4) (2019). In April 2020, the State sued Meta for violating the FCPA by failing to disclose the political ad information requested by Sanders and…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.17A.755(1) — 4 cases
Utter v. Bldg. Indus. Ass'n, 341 P.3d 953 (Wash. 2015). “RCW 42.17A.755 states: *422 (1) The commission may (a) determine whether an actual violation of this chapter has occurred; and (b) issue and enforce an appropriate order following such a determination.”
Freedom Found. v. Bethel Sch. Dist., At Al. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “RCW 42.17A.755 and RCW 42.17A.775 A person who believes the FCPA has been violated may bring an action in the name of the State against the alleged violator in certain circumstances.”
Freedom Found., V. Serv. Employees Int'l Union 775 (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “It argued that Freedom Foundation was barred from bringing a citizen’s action because the PDC had dismissed Freedom Foundation’s complaint within the requisite 90 days.”
Auto. United Trades Org., V Washington Pub. Discl (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “120(4) and RCW 42.17A.755. RCW 42.30.120(4) entitles a prevailing party in an action against a public agency under the OPMA to an award of costs, including reasonable attorney fees.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.17A.755(1)(a) — 2 cases
Freedom Found. v. Bethel Sch. Dist., At Al. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “RCW 42.17A.755 and RCW 42.17A.775 A person who believes the FCPA has been violated may bring an action in the name of the State against the alleged violator in certain circumstances.”
Freedom Found., V. Serv. Employees Int'l Union 775 (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “It argued that Freedom Foundation was barred from bringing a citizen’s action because the PDC had dismissed Freedom Foundation’s complaint within the requisite 90 days.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.17A.755(2) — 1 case
Freedom Found., V. Serv. Employees Int'l Union 775 (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “It argued that Freedom Foundation was barred from bringing a citizen’s action because the PDC had dismissed Freedom Foundation’s complaint within the requisite 90 days.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.17A.755(3) — 1 case
Utter v. Bldg. Indus. Ass'n, 341 P.3d 953 (Wash. 2015). “RCW 42.17A.755 states: *422 (1) The commission may (a) determine whether an actual violation of this chapter has occurred; and (b) issue and enforce an appropriate order following such a determination.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.17A.755(4) — 1 case
State v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (Wash. 2026). “The PDC voted to refer the Sanders and Trask complaints to the attorney general for enforcement pursuant to former RCW 42.17A.755(4) (2019). In April 2020, the State sued Meta for violating the FCPA by failing to disclose the political ad information requested by Sanders and…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.17A.755(5) — 1 case
Freedom Found. v. Bethel Sch. Dist., At Al. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “RCW 42.17A.755 and RCW 42.17A.775 A person who believes the FCPA has been violated may bring an action in the name of the State against the alleged violator in certain circumstances.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.17A.755(l) — 1 case
Utter v. Bldg. Indus. Ass'n, 341 P.3d 953 (Wash. 2015). “RCW 42.17A.755 states: *422 (1) The commission may (a) determine whether an actual violation of this chapter has occurred; and (b) issue and enforce an appropriate order following such a determination.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.