Wash. Rev. Code » Title 42 · Chapter 42.52
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.52.900 (2026)

Legislative declaration

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Government derives its powers from the people. Ethics in government are the foundation on which the structure of government rests. State officials and employees of government hold a public trust that obligates them, in a special way, to honesty and integrity in fulfilling the responsibilities to which they are elected and appointed. Paramount in that trust is the principle that public office, whether elected or appointed, may not be used for personal gain or private advantage.
The citizens of the state expect all state officials and employees to perform their public responsibilities in accordance with the highest ethical and moral standards and to conduct the business of the state only in a manner that advances the public's interest. State officials and employees are subject to the sanctions of law and scrutiny of the media; ultimately, however, they are accountable to the people and must consider this public accountability as a particular obligation of the public service. Only when affairs of government are conducted, at all levels, with openness as provided by law and an unswerving commitment to the public good does government work as it should.
The obligations of government rest equally on the state's citizenry. The effectiveness of government depends, fundamentally, on the confidence citizens can have in the judgments and decisions of their elected representatives. Citizens, therefore, should honor and respect the principles and the spirit of representative democracy, recognizing that both elected and appointed officials, together with state employees, seek to carry out their public duties with professional skill and dedication to the public interest. Such service merits public recognition and support.
All who have the privilege of working for the people of Washington state can have but one aim: To give the highest public service to its citizens.
[ 1994 c 154 s 1.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: Hubbard v. Spokane Cnty., 50 P.3d 602 (Wash. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hubbard v. Spokane Cnty., 50 P.3d 602 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 3× “154, addresses general ethical standards for state employees, and was codified at RCW 42.52.900. Chapter 42.52 RCW concerns ethics in public service and deals exclusively with state agencies, state officers, and state employees.”
Knudsen v. Washington State Exec. Ethics Bd., 156 Wash. App. 852 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “160(1) reads: No state officer or state employee may employ or use any person, money, or property under the officer’s or employee’s official control or direction, or in his or her official custody, for the private benefit or gain of the officer, employee, or another.”
Knudsen v. Wash. State Exec. Ethics Bd., 235 P.3d 835 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “160(1) reads: No state officer or state employee may employ or use any person, money, or property under the officer's or employee's official control or direction, or in his or her official custody, for the private benefit or gain of the officer, employee, or another.”
Hubbard v. Spokene Cnty., 50 P.3d 602 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 3× “154, addresses general ethical standards for state employees, and was codified at RCW 42.52.900. Chapter 42.52 RCW concerns ethics in public service and deals exclusively with state agencies, state officers, and state employees.”
Brady Horenstein v. Exec. Ethics Bd. (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “RCW 42.52.900 (emphasis added). The EPSA sets out various restrictions on state employees including restricting state employees from having “an interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect, or engag[ing] in a business or transaction or professional activity, or…”
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.