Wash. Rev. Code » Title 42 · Chapter 42.36
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.36.040 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Prior to declaring as a candidate for public office or while campaigning for public office as defined by RCW 42.17A.005 no public discussion or expression of an opinion by a person subsequently elected to a public office, on any pending or proposed quasi-judicial actions, shall be a violation of the appearance of fairness doctrine.
[ 2011 c 60 s 27; 1982 c 229 s 4.]

Notes:

Effective date—2011 c 60: See RCW 42.17A.919.
PDF

RCW 42.36.040

Public Discussion by Candidate for Public Office. (Effective January 1, 2026.)

Prior to declaring as a candidate for public office or while campaigning for public office as defined by RCW 29B.10.440 no public discussion or expression of an opinion by a person subsequently elected to a public office, on any pending or proposed quasi-judicial actions, shall be a violation of the appearance of fairness doctrine.
[ 2024 c 164 s 512; 2011 c 60 s 27; 1982 c 229 s 4.]

Notes:

Intent—Construction—Rules remain valid—Effective date—2024 c 164: See notes following RCW 29B.10.010.
Effective date—2011 c 60: See note following RCW 29B.20.030.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1996–1996 · leading case: Org. to Preserve Agric. Lands v. Adams Cnty., 913 P.2d 793 (Wash. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Org. to Preserve Agric. Lands v. Adams Cnty., 913 P.2d 793 (Wash. 1996). “020, or for expressing an opinion on a pending or proposed quasi-judicial action while campaigning for public office, RCW 42.36.040. *887 OPAL has not demonstrated that the phone calls between Waste Management and Commissioner Schlagel involved communication "with respect to the…”
Org. to Preserve Agr. v. Adams Co., 913 P.2d 793 (Wash. 1996). “020, or for expressing an opinion on a pending or proposed quasi-judicial action while campaigning for public office, RCW 42.36.040. OPAL has not demonstrated that the phone calls between Waste Management and Commissioner Schlagel involved communication "with respect to the…”
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.