Legislative ethics hearing in Olympia examines whether Rep. Tara Simmons steered proviso funding and directed donations to hire a friend

OLYMPIA, Wash. — The Washington State Legislative Ethics Board opened a multi‑day hearing June 8 to examine allegations that Rep. Tara Simmons used her office to benefit outside organizations and directed campaign‑surplus donations to influence hiring at a nonprofit.

Assistant Attorney General Julia Eisentraut, representing board staff, told the panel in opening statements that staff would present evidence that Simmons sponsored a 2024 budget proviso that in part benefited Equity in Education (EEC) while she was employed there, and that she used campaign surplus funds to donate to American Equity and Justice Group (AEJG) and directed that money be used to hire Antoine Coleman. "Because board staff will prove by more than a preponderance of the evidence that Representative Simmons committed these violations, we will ask that you impose a penalty of up to $5,000 per violation in addition to assessing costs," Eisentraut said.

Simmons's attorney, Douglas McKinley, disputed the central premise. He told the board staff's opening that Simmons believed she had permission to sponsor provisos that could benefit an outside employer, citing a Sept. 25, 2020 letter from the board's counsel. "Absent facts that legislators engage in any of these types of prohibited employment, the ethics act does not prohibit a legislator from inducing, supporting, advocating, or voting for legislation that may benefit the outside employer," McKinley argued, characterizing the staff's claims as alleging "technical violations" rather than personal profit.

Board staff called a series of witnesses. Kim (Kimberly) Gordon, who testified she was AEJG's founding board treasurer and an early employee, said AEJG received two donations from Simmons: one for $10,000 and a later one for $40,000. Gordon testified the donations were discussed at AEJG meetings as intended to fund the hire of a "formerly incarcerated individual," and that when AEJG learned Simmons had a personal relationship with Antoine Coleman the board concluded the contributions presented "a potential conflict of interest," declined to cash the $40,000, and returned the $10,000.

"The purpose was for us to hire a formerly incarcerated individual," Gordon testified. She also described efforts by AEJG to secure and integrate education data under a subcontract with Equity in Education and said EEC did not deliver expected assistance; AEJG compiled a six‑month report for the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) documenting AEJG's work and what AEJG said were gaps in EEC's performance.

AEJG's executive director, Anthony Powers, testified he first met Simmons in December 2023 while discussing a possible proviso and that Simmons suggested a person she had met, Antoine Coleman, and offered to donate if AEJG wished to hire him. Powers said he ultimately decided to hire Coleman, but that later, as disputes over EEC's subcontract performance and Simmons's involvement escalated, AEJG raised concerns with AOC.

Chris Stanley, chief financial and management officer for the Administrative Office of the Courts, testified that when AEJG reported EEC was not performing, AOC withheld payments pending a substantive response and convened a meeting with AEJG and EEC to resolve deliverables. "When I learned that a subcontractor for one of our contractors wasn't performing the work that we were paying for ... [AOC] withheld payment until we find out what's going on with the project," he wrote in an email introduced at the hearing and described in testimony.

Defense counsel repeatedly pressed witnesses on documentary support: McKinley noted that neither the $10,000 nor $40,000 donations included written, enforceable conditions that specifically required hiring Coleman, and he emphasized that Simmons's campaign‑surplus donations were lawful gifts to a registered nonprofit under Public Disclosure Commission rules. McKinley also highlighted the Sept. 25, 2020 letter from the ethics board's counsel that McKinley said informed Simmons's understanding about sponsoring provisos.

Witnesses and counsel debated whether text messages and social‑media posts reflected inappropriate use of legislative power. Board staff said the texts showed Simmons sought to influence AEJG decisions; defense counsel said the messages must be read in the context of personal relationships and contested the claim that Simmons sought special privileges.

No final determination was reached on June 8. After AOC's witness testimony, board staff rested its case, subject to possible rebuttal. Judge TJ Martin recessed the hearing and set the respondent's opportunity to present her case for the following morning at 9 a.m. The Legislative Ethics Board will later decide, after deliberation, whether board staff proved violations by a preponderance of the evidence and, if so, the appropriate sanction under the cited RCW provisions.

What happens next

The panel has not issued a finding. The hearing is scheduled to resume with the respondent's case at 9 a.m. on the next scheduled date. If the board finds violations by the standard in administrative proceedings, board staff indicated it will seek penalties up to $5,000 per violation plus costs.