Wash. Rev. Code » Title 42 · Chapter 42.30
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.30.060 (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) No governing body of a public agency shall adopt any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive, except in a meeting open to the public and then only at a meeting, the date of which is fixed by law or rule, or at a meeting of which notice has been given according to the provisions of this chapter. Any action taken at meetings failing to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be null and void.
(2) No governing body of a public agency at any meeting required to be open to the public shall vote by secret ballot. Any vote taken in violation of this subsection shall be null and void, and shall be considered an "action" under this chapter.
[ 1989 c 42 s 1; 1971 ex.s. c 250 s 6.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 56 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: Loeffelholz v. Citizens for Leaders With Ethics & Acct. Now, 82 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Loeffelholz v. Citizens for Leaders With Ethics & Acct. Now, 82 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 6× “”) (emphasis added); RCW 42.30.060(1) (“No governing body of a public agency shall adopt any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive, except in a meeting open to the public .”
Feature Realty, Inc. v. City of Spokane, 331 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2003). · cites it 4× “It is the first sentence of RCW 42.30.060 which states which actions must be taken at meetings open to the public.”
Refai v. Cent. Washington Univ., 742 P.2d 137 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “Is the resulting layoff plan void because SEC meetings were not open to the public? RCW 42.30.060 provides: Ordinances, rules, resolutions, regulations, etc.”
Miller v. City of Tacoma, 979 P.2d 429 (Wash. 1999). · cites it 2× “110, but rather RCW 42.30.060(1), a provision of the act which requires an "ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive" must be adopted at a public meeting which has been scheduled in accordance with the provisions of the act.”
Miller v. City of Tacoma, 138 Wash. 2d 318 (Wash. 1999). · cites it 2× “110, but rather RCW 42.30.060(1), a provision of the act which requires an “ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive” must be adopted at a public meeting which has been scheduled in accordance with the provisions of the act.”
Slaughter v. Snohomish Cnty. Fire Prot. Dist. No. 20, 750 P.2d 656 (Wash. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 6× “RCW 42.30.060 provides: *738 No governing body of a public agency shall adopt any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive, except in a meeting open to the public and then only at a meeting, the date of which is fixed by law or rule, or at a meeting of which…”
In re the Recall of Boldt, 386 P.3d 1104 (Wash. 2017). “Mielke contends that neither he nor Madore was notified of this secret meeting as mandated by RCW 42.30.060, making any vote taken in such a meeting null and void.”
Loeffelholz v. Citizens for Leaders, 82 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 6× “030 ("All meetings of the governing body of a public agency shall be open and public") (emphasis added); RCW 42.30.060 ("No governing body of a public agency shall adopt any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive, except in a meeting open to the public")…”
Citizens All. for Prop. Rights Legal Fund v. San Juan Cnty., 359 P.3d 753 (Wash. 2015). “Finally, I agree with the necessarily implied conclusion that even if the CAO Team did violate the OPMA, the ordinances at issue in this case are not void under RCW 42.30.060(1). I therefore concur in part.”
Hook v. Lincoln Cty. Noxious Weed Control, 269 P.3d 1056 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “Through the resolution, the commissioners simply made a finding whose result was to cause comprehensive state regulation to be exercised not by the director of agriculture, but by the county weed control board earlier created by the legislature. ¶ 25 Mr. Hook also suggests that…”
Eugster v. City of Spokane, 118 Wash. App. 383 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “” RCW 42.30.060(1). “ ‘Action’ means the transaction of the official business of a public agency by a governing body including but not limited to receipt of public testimony, deliberations, discussions, considerations, reviews, evaluations, and final actions.”
Eugster v. City of Spokane, 76 P.3d 741 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “" RCW 42.30.060(1). "`Action' means the transaction of the official business of a public agency by a governing body including but not limited to receipt of public testimony, deliberations, discussions, considerations, reviews, evaluations, and final actions.”
Show all 56 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.30.060(1) — 37 cases
Loeffelholz v. Citizens for Leaders With Ethics & Acct. Now, 82 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “”) (emphasis added); RCW 42.30.060(1) (“No governing body of a public agency shall adopt any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive, except in a meeting open to the public .”
Citizens All. for Prop. Rights Legal Fund v. San Juan Cnty., 359 P.3d 753 (Wash. 2015). “Finally, I agree with the necessarily implied conclusion that even if the CAO Team did violate the OPMA, the ordinances at issue in this case are not void under RCW 42.30.060(1). I therefore concur in part.”
Hook v. Lincoln Cty. Noxious Weed Control, 269 P.3d 1056 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “Through the resolution, the commissioners simply made a finding whose result was to cause comprehensive state regulation to be exercised not by the director of agriculture, but by the county weed control board earlier created by the legislature. ¶ 25 Mr. Hook also suggests that…”
Eugster v. City of Spokane, 118 Wash. App. 383 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “” RCW 42.30.060(1). “ ‘Action’ means the transaction of the official business of a public agency by a governing body including but not limited to receipt of public testimony, deliberations, discussions, considerations, reviews, evaluations, and final actions.”
Eugster v. City of Spokane, 76 P.3d 741 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “" RCW 42.30.060(1). "`Action' means the transaction of the official business of a public agency by a governing body including but not limited to receipt of public testimony, deliberations, discussions, considerations, reviews, evaluations, and final actions.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.30.060(2) — 3 cases
Miller v. City of Tacoma, 979 P.2d 429 (Wash. 1999). “110, but rather RCW 42.30.060(1), a provision of the act which requires an "ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive" must be adopted at a public meeting which has been scheduled in accordance with the provisions of the act.”
Miller v. City of Tacoma, 138 Wash. 2d 318 (Wash. 1999). “110, but rather RCW 42.30.060(1), a provision of the act which requires an “ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive” must be adopted at a public meeting which has been scheduled in accordance with the provisions of the act.”
Eugster v. City of Spokane, 114 P.3d 1200 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.30.060(4) — 1 case
R.L. McFarland v. Gregory A. Tompkins, 567 P.3d 1128 (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
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.