South Kitsap School Supporters: Alleged violation of RCW 42.17A.320 for failure to provide "Paid for by" sponsor identification on the committee's website (EY25 MAY25)

Case

#172574

Respondent

South Kitsap School Supporters

Complainant

Conner Edwards

Description

The Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) completed its review of the complaint filed by Conner Edwards on May 16, 2025. The complaint alleged a violation of RCW 42.17A.320 by failing to include complete sponsor identification language on the committee’s website, specifically “Paid for by” indicating who sponsored (paid for) the website.

The complaint also alleged a violation of RCW 42.17A.235 and .240 for inaccurate or incomplete reporting based on the existence of two February C-4 reports for the committee which allegedly contained different beginning and ending balances. However, PDC staff learned that the existence of two C-4 reports for February, 2025 was the result of there being a prior committee that registered in 2023 and concluded its activities on February 15, 2025, and the registration of a new committee, by the same name, on February 15, 2025. There was no discrepancy in the dollar amounts reported for the closed committee’s ending balance and the new committee’s beginning balance. As a result, the allegation concerning .235 and .240 is dismissed.

Applicable Laws and Rules

RCW 42.17A.005(40) defines "political advertising" to include “digital communication, or other means of mass communication, used for the purpose of appealing, directly or indirectly, for votes or for financial or other support or opposition in any election campaign.” WAC 390-05-290 specifically identifies “internet websites” as a form of “mass communication.”

RCW 42.17A.005(47)(a) defines a “sponsor” to mean the person[1] paying for the advertising.

Per RCW 42.17A.320(1), all written political advertising, whether relating to candidates or ballot propositions, must include the sponsor’s name and address, and WAC 390-18-010(2) states “all advertising must clearly state…that it has been paid for by the sponsor.”

Background and Findings

South Kitsap School Supporters (the “Respondent”) had two registered committees during election year 2025:

Committee #1 registered on November 30, 2023 indicating their support for South Kitsap SD 402, participated in the February 2025 Special Election, reported expenditures for signs and postage, and filed their post-election C-4 report early on February 15, 2025, which they noted was their “Final” report.
Committee #2, by the same name, registered on February 15, 2025 and indicated their support for a South Kitsap SD 402 bond or levy in the 2025 Primary Election. However, the second committee later said its plans had changed and they no longer planned to participate in the 2025 Primary. The second committee has received & reported monthly payroll deductions of $333/month for January-June that were reported as lump sum “Small Contributions” and three $25 contributions received in late June. To date, the second committee has not made any expenditures.

The Respondent has a website https://southkitsapschoolsupporters.com/ which contains 1) a statement indicating it is “dedicated to [the] passage of bonds and levies for the South Kitsap School District;” 2) a link to the school district’s webpage regarding its most recent levy, Prop. 1 (which passed in the February 11, 2025 Special Election); and 3) a “Make a Contribution” page. The website also contains a “Bonds vs. Levies” page that specifically mentions the school district, and a “Contact Us” page that asks the reader whether they want to get involved, endorse the campaign or volunteer.

Internet websites are a form of mass communication and the Respondent’s site is used to appeal for financial or other support for South Kitsap School District levies and bonds and is therefore political advertising. Subsequently, sponsor identification (ID) is required.

On June 2, 2025, the Respondent emailed PDC staff and said their plans had changed and they would not be participating in the 2025 Primary Election. They also stated the committee has not made any expenditures in 2025[2] and thus falls below the $750 reporting threshold but would file reports because they strive for full transparency with the public, regardless of reporting thresholds.

The Respondent added “Paid for by” language to their website on June 3, 2025.

On June 3, 2025, the Respondent provided a written response to the complaint and indicated the following:

The committee disputed the allegation that their website is subject to additional sponsor ID. They contend it is an organizational website – not a campaign or political website – because it lacks mention of a specific election campaign and information regarding proposed ballot measures and does not advocate for voting a particular way. They said it is obvious the website is owned and paid for by South Kitsap School Supporters because their contact information, purpose, and officers are all listed on the site, and any reasonable person would conclude that they pay for the site. Nonetheless, the committee stated they added the requested “Paid for by” language to their website.
The committee 1) participated in the February 2025 Special Election filed as a single election committee; and 2) filed again as a single election committee for the 2025 Primary Election. However, the Respondent said they have not made, and do not anticipate making, any expenditures for the Primary Election.

The committee does not have any warnings[3]/violations of RCW 42.17A.320 regarding sponsor ID.

Summary and Resolution

Noncompliance appears to be the result of a good-faith misunderstanding regarding what constitutes political advertising and therefore requires complete sponsor identification. However, the missing “Paid for by” language on the Respondent’s website is mitigated by the fact that their identity was obvious, as evidenced by the presence of their name, address, and other content. There also did not appear to be any intent to deceive the public, and the public was not deprived of the Respondent’s identity, which are mitigating factors.

After consideration of all the circumstances, further proceedings would not serve the purposes of this chapter. Under WAC 390-37-070, the executive director, at any time prior to consideration by the Commission, may dismiss a complaint which on its face, or as shown by investigation, provides reason to believe that a violation has occurred, but also shows that the respondent is in substantial compliance with the relevant statutes or rules, or shows that formal enforcement action is not warranted. The executive director must report at each regular Commission meeting all complaints dismissed.

PDC staff reminded the Respondent about the importance of including full sponsor ID language on their website in the future in accordance with the PDC laws, rules or guidance.

Based on this information, the PDC has dismissed this matter in accordance with RCW 42.17A.755(1) and WAC 390-37-060(1)(d).

[1] Person" includes “an individual, partnership, joint venture, public or private corporation, association, federal, state, or local governmental entity or agency however constituted, candidate, committee, political committee, political party, executive committee thereof, or any other organization or group of persons, however organized.” RCW 42.17A.005(39).

[2] The committee timely reported their $24.20 domain name renewal & $52.46 WordPress renewal as non-itemized expenditures on their November and December 2024 C-4 reports.

[3] The committee previously received a Warning letter for a case involving activity pursuant to RCW 42.17A.235 & .240.

Disposition

Case Closed with Reminder

Date Opened

May 22, 2025

Areas of Law*

RCW 29B.30.050/42.17A.320

*On January 1, 2026, RCW 42.17A was recodified to RCW 29B