Washington House Bill HB2059

Washington 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/25/25
• Refer: 3/25/25

Caption

AN ACT Relating to requiring certain disclosures from private entities that receive state funding;

Summary

HB2059 would require private entities that receive state-funded grants, either directly or as subgrantees, to publicly disclose specified information on their website or another publicly accessible platform within five business days of receiving the award. The required disclosures include the names and wages of employees, the names and compensation of board members, political contributions made in the prior four election cycles, the names of any lobbyists employed or contracted by the entity, and an accounting of how grant funds were spent. The bill also directs state and local agencies that award such grants to ensure grantees and subgrantees comply with these disclosure requirements. If a recipient fails to comply, the grant award must be forfeited and the noncompliant entity must reimburse the grantor for the full amount of the funds awarded. The bill defines “agency,” “state agency,” “local agency,” “grant,” and “private entity,” and excludes ordinary procurement transactions for goods and services from the definition of grant. It creates a new chapter in Title 43 RCW.

Impact

HB2059 would add a new transparency and enforcement framework to Washington law for private recipients of state-funded grants. It would impose new public reporting obligations on nonprofits and other nonpublic entities receiving grant money, and it would require state and local grant-making agencies to police compliance. The bill’s penalty structure is significant: noncompliance could trigger forfeiture of the award and repayment of the full grant amount, which could materially affect how grants are administered and how recipients document payroll, governance, political activity, lobbying, and spending.

Sentiment

No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or formal support/opposition in the available record. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be framed as a government transparency and accountability proposal, with a strong compliance and disclosure emphasis. The absence of recorded action also suggests there is no documented consensus or controversy in the supplied materials.

Contention

The main points of contention likely center on the breadth of the required disclosures and the severity of the enforcement mechanism. Private entities receiving grants may object to having to publish employee wages, board compensation, political contributions, and lobbying relationships, especially where those entities are nonprofits or mission-driven organizations. Another likely concern is the forfeiture-and-repayment penalty, which is strict and could be viewed as disproportionate for administrative noncompliance. Supporters would likely emphasize transparency, public accountability, and oversight of state-funded spending, while opponents would likely focus on privacy, administrative burden, and potential chilling effects on organizations seeking public funding.