Initiatives and referenda

AN ACT Relating to protecting the integrity of the state 1
initiative and referendum process by requiring a demonstration of 2
support before issuance of a ballot measure title and authorizing 3
citizen actions for certain signature gatherer compensation 4
violations; amending RCW 29A.72.010, 29A.72.020, and 29A.72.030; 5
adding new sections to chapter 29A.72 RCW; and prescribing penalties.6
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:7
NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 29A.72 8
RCW to read as follows: 9
(1) The legislature recognizes that the people have reserved for 10
themselves the power to enact or reject legislation through the 11
initiative and referendum process, as provided in Article II, section 12
1 of the state Constitution. The legislature determines that this 13
constitutional right must be guarded against fraud and mistake and 14
that reasonable procedural safeguards are necessary to promote the 15
integrity and proper functioning of the initiative and referendum 16
process. 17
(2) The legislature finds that: 18
(a) As stated in RCW 29A.84.280, "paying a worker, whose task it 19
is to secure the signatures of voters on initiative or referendum 20
petitions, on the basis of the number of signatures the worker 21
H-2697.1
HOUSE BILL 2259
State of Washington 69th Legislature 2026 Regular Session
By Representatives Mena, Ramel, Ryu, Peterson, Berry, Reed, Cortes,
Parshley, Street, Duerr, Scott, Thomas, Stonier, Gregerson, Ormsby,
Goodman, Farivar, Macri, Fosse, Hill, Thai, Pollet, and Salahuddin
Prefiled 01/05/26. Read first time 01/12/26. Referred to Committee
on State Government & Tribal Relations.
p. 1 HB 2259
secures on the petitions encourages the introduction of fraud in the 1
signature gathering process. Such a form of payment may act as an 2
incentive for the worker to encourage a person to sign a petition 3
which the person is not qualified to sign or to sign a petition for a 4
ballot measure even if the person has already signed a petition for 5
the measure." Nevertheless, paying a worker based on the number of 6
signatures that worker secures has proliferated in Washington state 7
and is routinely used by ballot measure proponents to qualify 8
initiatives and referenda. 9
(b) Currently, the law does not effectively deter initiative or 10
referendum sponsors or signature-gathering entities from providing or 11
receiving compensation or gratuity based directly or indirectly on 12
the number of signatures obtained on an initiative or referendum 13
petition. The legislature finds that compensation structures based on 14
signature counts encourage fraud and mistake by incentivizing 15
signature forgery, duplicate signing, or misrepresentation or 16
concealment of the petition's contents. 17
(c) Washington's record shows a recurring pattern of signature 18
fraud associated with per-signature compensation. For example, state 19
investigators uncovered forged petition sheets submitted in support 20
of Initiative Measure No. 985 in 2008, resulting in a criminal 21
conviction. Elections staff reviewing Initiative Measure No. 1163 in 22
2011 found hundreds of fabricated signatures, including entire sheets 23
written in a single hand. During the 2012 reviews of Referendum 24
Measure No. 74 and Initiative Measure No. 1185, the secretary of 25
state identified more than 1,000 forged signatures submitted by a 26
circulator paid per signature, who later pleaded guilty. That same 27
year, Initiative Measure No. 1240 petitions were flagged for 28
fabricated names and forged entries, later memorialized in 29
legislative findings. And in 2013, the random sample checks for 30
Initiative Measure No. 517 and Initiative Measure No. 522 revealed 31
what the secretary of state described as some of the most extensive 32
irregularities the office had seen, including thousands of suspect 33
signatures tied to paid circulators who were paid per signature.34
(d) The ninth circuit upheld Oregon's restriction on per 35
signature compensation based on evidence from the late 1990s through 36
2002 which showed a direct relationship between volume-based pay and 37
fraud and a pattern of forged signatures, clipboard stacking, and 38
false circulator certifications. Montana's record showed a similar 39
pattern of abuse. In 2006, a state court removed two initiatives from 40
p. 2 HB 2259
the ballot after investigators documented forged signatures, 1
falsified circulator affidavits, and misrepresentations by out-of-2
state paid circulators. The legislature responded by prohibiting per 3
signature compensation, and the ninth circuit later upheld that 4
prohibition as constitutionally permissible. 5
(e) More recently, the secretary of state's review of a three 6
percent sample of petition signatures submitted in support of 7
Washington initiatives and referenda has failed to detect additional 8
instances of fraud. However, multistate contractors that operate in 9
Washington have been implicated in petition fraud occurring in other 10
states. In 2023, a professional firm that previously worked in 11
Washington state had six circulators in Colorado charged with 12
felonies for submitting forged congressional candidate petitions.13
(f) Washington's increasingly active initiative environment also 14
compounds this concern. In recent years, multiple ballot measures 15
have circulated at the same time, including in 2023, when one sponsor 16
sought to qualify six initiatives. To qualify for the ballot, each 17
initiative measure must currently submit at least 308,911 valid 18
signatures within a few months, which in practice means collecting 19
closer to 400,000. These requirements create intense pressure on paid 20
circulators to prioritize speed and volume. Combined with per-21
signature compensation, this environment rewards high-output tactics 22
and raises the risk of fraud, error, and misrepresentation.23
(g) To adequately guard the people's initiative and referendum 24
right against fraud and mistake, the legislature determines that 25
prohibiting compensation or gratuity based directly or indirectly on 26
the number of signatures gathered is necessary. 27
(h) Other states, including Oregon, Montana, and Arizona, have 28
adopted comparable restrictions on per-signature compensation to 29
protect the integrity of the initiative and referendum process and 30
continued to see initiatives and referenda qualify for the ballot at 31
stable levels. Restricting per-signature compensation has not reduced 32
access to the ballot. 33
(3) Additionally, the legislature finds that: 34
(a) In recent years, numerous proposed initiatives and referenda 35
with minimal or no public support have been repeatedly filed with the 36
secretary of state, including dozens of near-identical versions of 37
the same measure. For example, in 2024, there were 18 versions of the 38
same measure filed as initiatives to the people or legislature. And 39
in 2023, one filer submitted 64 measures to the people.40
p. 3 HB 2259
(b) These duplicative and low-support versions of proposed 1
measures are often filed in an attempt to obtain a favorable ballot 2
title or to channel judicial review of the ballot title to a specific 3
judge. These tactics undermine the integrity and fairness of the 4
initiative and referendum process by encouraging strategic 5
manipulation of filing procedures, increasing the risk of 6
inconsistent ballot titles for substantively identical measures.7
(c) The legislature further finds that the filing of multiple 8
proposed measures with minimal public support imposes a substantial 9
burden and cost on the secretary of state, the attorney general, and 10
the office of the code reviser. In recent filing cycles, these 11
offices have expended significant staff resources reviewing and 12
processing duplicative proposed measures. 13
(d) Based on these findings, the legislature determines that 14
requiring a legal voter of the state proposing an initiative or 15
referendum to gather at least 1,000 signatures prior to filing the 16
proposed measure with the secretary of state will alleviate these 17
burdens by ensuring that only proposals with a minimal threshold of 18
public support proceed through the drafting and ballot title process, 19
and facilitate the initiative and referendum process by limiting 20
ballot title- and judge-shopping. The legislature notes that other 21
states, including Oregon and Ohio, require preliminary sponsorship 22
signatures before a measure may be filed, demonstrating that such 23
requirements facilitate the initiative process. 24
NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 29A.72 25
RCW to read as follows: 26
(1) It shall be unlawful to provide or receive money or other 27
consideration for signature gathering based on the number of 28
signatures obtained on an initiative or referendum petition. Nothing 29
herein prohibits providing or receiving money or other consideration 30
for signature gathering which is not based, either directly or 31
indirectly, on the number of signatures obtained. 32
(2)(a) A person who has reason to believe that this section has 33
been violated may bring a citizen's action in the name of the state 34
for an appropriate civil remedy, including but not limited to civil 35
penalties, against any initiative or referendum measure sponsor or 36
signature-gathering entity that violates this section.37
(i) If the person who brings the citizen's action prevails, the 38
judgment awarded shall escheat to the state, but he or she shall be 39
p. 4 HB 2259
entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs from the 1
defendant as fixed by the court. 2
(ii) In the case of a citizen's action that is dismissed and that 3
the court also finds was brought frivolously or in bad faith, the 4
court may order the person commencing the action to pay all 5
reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the defendant.6
(b) Civil penalties may not exceed $10,000 for each violation of 7
this section. 8
(c) Any action provided for in this section may be brought in the 9
superior court of the county of residence or principal place of 10
business of the initiative or referendum measure sponsor or 11
signature-gathering entity or the superior court of the county in 12
which a violation occurred. 13
(d) Any action brought under the provisions of this section must 14
be commenced within two years after the date when the violation 15
occurred. 16
(3) For the purposes of this section: 17
(a) "Entity" has the same meaning as in RCW 23B.01.400;18
(b) "Person" has the same meaning as in RCW 29B.10.400; and19
(c) "Signature-gathering entity" means a person or entity that is 20
employed, paid, or otherwise receives consideration or gratuity for 21
the purpose of soliciting or procuring signatures of voters on an 22
initiative or referendum petition. 23
Sec. 3. RCW 29A.72.010 and 2015 c 72 s 10 are each amended to 24
read as follows: 25
(1) If any legal voter of the state, either individually or on 26
behalf of an organization, desires to petition the legislature to 27
enact a proposed measure, or submit a proposed initiative measure to 28
the people, or order that a referendum of all or part of any act, 29
bill, or law, passed by the legislature be submitted to the people, 30
he or she shall file with the secretary of state: 31
(((1))) (a) A legible copy of the measure proposed, or the act or 32
part of such act on which a referendum is desired;33
(((2))) (b) A signed affidavit, or electronic submission, that 34
the sponsor is a registered voter; ((and35
(3))) (c) A filing fee prescribed under RCW 43.07.120; and36
(d) A petition, bearing the signatures of at least 1,000 legal 37
voters in support of the proposed measure, including the legal 38
voter's name and the address, city, and county at which he or she is 39
p. 5 HB 2259
registered to vote. The signature sheets used to collect signatures 1
as required by this subsection must meet the requirements of RCW 2
29A.72.100, except for the inclusion of the title. 3
(2)(a) The secretary of state shall, prior to submitting a copy 4
of the proposed measure to the office of the code reviser under RCW 5
29A.72.020, verify and canvass the signatures and names of the legal 6
voters submitted pursuant to subsection (1) of this section. The 7
secretary of state shall, by rule, establish procedures to implement 8
this subsection.9
(b) The secretary of state may use statistical sampling 10
techniques authorized under RCW 29A.72.230 to verify whether a 11
petition contains the required number of signatures of legal voters.12
(3) The secretary of state may not accept for filing any proposed 13
measure submitted pursuant to this section if:14
(a) The legal voter failed to submit the documents required under 15
subsection (1)(a) and (b) of this section;16
(b) The legal voter failed to submit the filing fee required 17
under subsection (1)(c) of this section; or18
(c) The legal voter failed to submit the petition required under 19
subsection (1)(d) of this section or the petition clearly bears 20
insufficient signatures.21
Sec. 4. RCW 29A.72.020 and 2003 c 111 s 1803 are each amended to 22
read as follows: 23
Upon ((receipt of a proposed initiative measure )) verifying that 24
the proposed measure contains the number of signatures required under 25
RCW 29A.72.010(1)(d), and before giving it a serial number, the 26
secretary of state shall submit a copy thereof to the office of the 27
code reviser and give notice to the sponsor of such transmittal. Upon 28
receipt of the measure, the assistant code reviser to whom it has 29
been assigned may confer with the sponsor and shall within seven 30
working days from its receipt, review the proposal and recommend to 31
the sponsor such revision or alteration of the measure as may be 32
deemed necessary and appropriate. The recommendations of the code 33
reviser's office are advisory only, and the sponsor may accept or 34
reject them in whole or in part. The code reviser shall issue a 35
certificate of review certifying that he or she has reviewed the 36
measure and that any recommendations have been communicated to the 37
sponsor. The certificate must be issued whether or not the sponsor 38
accepts such recommendations. Within fifteen working days after 39
p. 6 HB 2259
notification of submittal of the proposed measure to the code 1
reviser's office, the sponsor, if he or she desires to proceed with 2
sponsorship, shall file the measure together with the certificate of 3
review with the secretary of state for assignment of a serial number, 4
and the secretary of state shall then submit to the code reviser's 5
office a certified copy of the measure filed. Upon submission of the 6
proposal to the secretary of state for assignment of a serial number, 7
the secretary of state shall refuse to make such assignment unless 8
the proposal is accompanied by a certificate of review.9
Sec. 5. RCW 29A.72.030 and 2003 c 111 s 1804 are each amended to 10
read as follows: 11
(1) Initiative measures proposed to be submitted to the people 12
must be filed with the secretary of state within ten months prior to 13
the election at which they are to be submitted, and the signature 14
petitions meeting the requirements under RCW 29A.72.010 and 15
29A.72.150 must be filed with the secretary of state not less than 16
four months before the next general statewide election.17
(2) Initiative measures proposed to be submitted to the 18
legislature must be filed with the secretary of state within ten 19
months prior to the next regular session of the legislature at which 20
they are to be submitted, and the signature petitions meeting the 21
requirements under RCW 29A.72.010 and 29A.72.150 must be filed with 22
the secretary of state not less than ten days before such regular 23
session of the legislature. 24
(3) A referendum measure petition ordering that any act or part 25
of an act passed by the legislature be referred to the people must 26
meet the requirements under RCW 29A.72.010 and 29A.72.150 and be 27
filed with the secretary of state within ninety days after the final 28
adjournment of the legislative session at which the act was passed. 29
It may be submitted at the next general statewide election or at a 30
special election ordered by the legislature. 31
(4) A proposed initiative or referendum measure may be filed no 32
earlier than the opening of the secretary of state's office for 33
business pursuant to RCW 42.04.060 on the first day filings are 34
permitted, and any initiative or referendum petition must be filed 35
not later than the close of business on the last business day in the 36
specified period for submission of signatures. If a filing deadline 37
falls on a Saturday, the office of the secretary of state must be 38
p. 7 HB 2259
open for the transaction of business under this section from 8:00 1
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on that Saturday. 2
NEW SECTION. Sec. 6. If any provision of this act or its 3
application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the 4
remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other 5
persons or circumstances is not affected.6
--- END ---
p. 8 HB 2259