The Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) has completed its review of the complaint filed by Conner Edwards on December 18, 2018. The complaint alleged that Up for Thurston County may have violated RCW 42.17A.320 for failure to disclose the name of controlling individuals or entities on political advertising; RCW 42.17A.205 for failure to disclose committee sponsorship by Puget Sound Energy after they made a contribution, constituting 100% of total contributions, on the day the committee was formed; RCW 42.17A.270 for failure to designate contributions earmarked to support election campaign of Candidate Oosterman; and RCW 42.17A.420 for making an earmarked in-kind contribution to Candidate Oosterman exceeding $5000, in the period beginning 21 days before an election. PDC staff reviewed your allegations; the applicable statutes, rules, and reporting requirements; the responses provided by Up for Thurston County; the applicable PDC reports filed by Respondent; and queried the Respondent’s data in the PDC contribution and expenditure database, to determine whether the record supports a finding of one or more violations. Based on our findings staff has determined that, in this instance, failure to disclose Puget Sound Energy as the 100% sponsor of Up for Thurston County on the day the committee was formed, and to include their sponsorship on political advertising, do not amount to actual violations warranting further investigation. Pursuant to WAC 390-37-060(1)(b), Up for Thurston County will receive a formal written warning concerning their failure to disclose the committee’s sponsorship by Puget Sound Energy at the time of registration, and failure to disclose the committee’s sponsorship by Puget Sound Energy on political advertising mailed within 21 days of the General Election. The formal written warning will include staff’s expectation that Up for Thurston County timely, accurately, and completely discloses committee sponsorship in the future. The Commission will consider the formal written warning in deciding on further Commission action if there are future violations of PDC laws or rules. Based on this information, the PDC finds that no further action is warranted and has dismissed this matter in accordance with RCW 42.17A.755(1).