Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Legislation SB5840 topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

PDC staff previews Senate Bill 5840 and debates address‑privacy tradeoffs and foreign‑contributor certifications

Washington State Public Disclosure Commission · December 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff told commissioners a Senate bill (SB 5840) has been filed concerning reporting changes; commissioners debated proposals to shield residential addresses on filings, and staff outlined options and enforcement implications related to foreign‑national certification requirements.

Staff told the commission that Senate Bill 5840, sponsored in the Senate by Sen. Wilson and Sen. Valdez, has been filed and that the agency will work with sponsors. The bill’s early focus is to address concerns about candidates’ residential addresses appearing in public filings and to consider mechanisms that protect safety and privacy while preserving the public’s ability to scrutinize contributions.

Commissioners and staff discussed the scope of any address‑privacy change. Staff noted complications including overlapping local reporting systems (for example, filings by the City of Seattle) and observed that many addresses are already findable via assessor websites. Commissioners explored alternatives such as reporting ZIP codes or legal descriptions rather than street addresses and flagged potential investigative and conflict‑of‑interest limits if granular location data are removed.

Separately, staff reviewed proposals about the certification process tied to the state prohibition on foreign nationals contributing to campaigns. Washington’s certification regime (implemented after legislation in 2020) asks non‑individual contributors to certify they are not foreign nationals; staff explained the certification provides committees with a degree of protection for accepting contributions and aids enforcement. Staff outlined options: retain the certification, replace it with a prohibition on receipt by committees and a due‑diligence standard, or craft a hybrid that preserves a compliance incentive. Commissioners were warned that removing certification without careful design could weaken enforcement tools and shift burdens to the agency.

No formal PDC position was adopted at the meeting. Staff said they will continue to brief sponsors, coordinate with partner jurisdictions, and return with options and technical comments to support legislative drafting and potential rulemaking.